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
This action is in reply to the application filed on 10/01/2024.
No claims have been amended.
No claims have been added.
Claims 30-70 have been cancelled.
Claims 1-29 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS(s)) submitted on 10/01/2024 has been received and considered.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: "marker comprised at least portion thereof" appears to be missing "a". Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 27 recites the broad recitation “wherein the user-specified task comprises one or more of solar farm maintenance processes,” and the claim also recites “including cleaning of solar panels,” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. For examination purposes, the cleaning of solar panels will be interpreted as a required feature of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 12-16, 18-19, and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gao et al (US 20200392684, hereinafter “Gao”).
Regarding Claim 1, Gao teaches:
A system for navigating an unmanned ground vehicle (UGV), comprising: a UGV comprising a controller configured to receive a navigation signal and operate the UGV in accordance with the navigation signal, (Gao ¶ 0079 lines 1-22 “In an embodiment an automatic snow removal system comprises an automatic moving snow removal device and a remote control device controlling the automatic moving snow removal device to operate, wherein the automatic moving snow removal device further comprises a working module, configured to execute specific work of the automatic moving snow removal device; a moving module, configured to drive the automatic moving snow removal device to move on the ground; […] and a control module, wherein the control module is configured to control the working module and the moving module of the automatic moving snow removal device; the automatic moving snow removal device further comprises a monitoring module and a communication module, the monitoring module is configured to monitor the surrounding environment of the automatic moving snow removal device, the communication module is configured to transmit information monitored by the monitoring module to the remote control device, receive a signal sent by the remote control device and sends the signal to the control module, and the control module controls the moving module and the working module according to the signal received by the communication module,” the control module being equivalent to the claimed controller, the communication module receiving a signal sent by the remote control device and controlling according to the signal received being equivalent to the claimed receiving a navigation signal and operating the UGV in accordance with the navigation signal)
the UGV having an identifying marker provided thereon; a sensor spaced apart from the UGV and at least temporarily fixed relative to a stretch of land on which the UGV is to operate, (Gao ¶ 0400 lines 6-28 “The snow removal system in the present embodiment comprises a snow blower 100 and a fixed site 800. The fixed site has a detection module and a site wireless communication module, wherein the detection module comprises a laser distance measuring module 820, a cloud deck camera 840 and a sensor configured to measure an angle (for example, a triaxial acceleration sensor), and correspondingly, the snow blower is provided with an obvious identified object 191 and a machine wireless communication module, wherein the cloud deck camera 840 can rotate for 360 degrees horizontally and can rotate for 180 degrees up and down, and the laser distance measuring module 820 is mounted aside the camera. The could deck is further provided with an angle sensor (not shown), the angle sensor, the camera 840 and the laser distance measuring module 820 are relatively static. The site wireless communication module on the fixed site can communicate with the snow blower. The top of the snow blower is provided with the identified object 191 having an obvious mark (for example, a specific color or specific shape, or a partially lighting object), the size of the identified object is very small relative to the snow blower, and can be conveniently subjected to image identification,” teaching a fixed sensor (fixed site 800 with detection module) spaced apart from the UGV, the UGV having an identifying marker (identified object 191))
the sensor being configured to: obtain a three-dimensional map (Gao ¶ 0051 lines 8-10 “the control module generates the border map in a 3D form according to the coordinate values and the dip angle values,”)
of the stretch of land, generate the navigation signal based on the three-dimensional map (Gao ¶ 0396 “In addition, the location navigation function may not be adopted, the working area of the snow blower is set in a remote control extraction manner, and the working area is recognized based on a video manner,” ¶ 0399 “The manner of setting the working area by the remote image is not limited to the above manner. In another embodiment, the snow blower further comprises a camera shooting/picture taking device disposed on the main body, configured to obtain an environment image and the images of close moving objects, in one embodiment, the camera shooting/picture taking device is a camera. The user can receive the image shot by the camera in real time by a mobile device such as a mobile phone, a computer and a remote control disposed on the snow blower, and remotely controls the snow blower to move and remove the snow, the controller records an advancing path, and the map is automatically generated after the recording is finished,” and ¶ 0400 lines 30-47 “The setting manner for the working area is as follows: enabling the snow blower to be on the fixed site, and enabling the camera to face front as an original point of the three-dimensional polar coordinates; remotely controlling […] the snow blower for a circle along the border to be swept, and ensuring that no people or other objects shield the snow blower from identifying the identified object in the advancing process; adjusting the camera on the fixed site in such process, […] at this point, recording the laser distance measuring distance L, and a planar offset angle α and a vertical angle θ of the camera, thereby obtaining the three-dimensional polar coordinates of the snow blower in such position. A continuous border track can be obtained by multipoint sampling to form a closed border,” ¶ 0399 describing the generation of the map and navigation commands for clearing snow using a camera on the UGV and ¶ 0400 describing that the process can be performed using a camera on the fixed site)
and a user- specified task, (Gao ¶ 0247 lines 26-27 “Specifically, as shown in FIGS. 8 and 9, the user manually inputs a snow removal area”)
and transmit the navigation signal to the controller. (Gao ¶ 0078 lines 14-25 “the automatic moving snow removal device further comprises a monitoring module and a communication module, the monitoring module is configured to monitor the surrounding environment of the automatic moving snow removal device, the communication module is configured to transmit information monitored by the monitoring module to the remote control device, receive a signal sent by the remote control device and sends the signal to the control module, and the control module controls the moving module and the working module according to the signal received by the communication module,”)
Regarding Claim 2, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the UGV comprises a grounds maintenance vehicle, an agricultural vehicle, a road maintenance vehicle, or a combination thereof. (Gao ¶ 0079 lines 1-3 “In an embodiment an automatic snow removal system comprises an automatic moving snow removal device,” the automatic snow removal device being analogous to a road maintenance device)
Regarding Claim 3, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 2 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the user-specified task comprises maintenance operation (Gao ¶ 0007 lines 2-5 “a snow removal device having an automatic working capacity comprises a working module, configured to execute specific work of the automatic snow removal device;” teaching the maintenance operation of snow removal)
for a defined portion of the stretch of land. (Gao ¶ 0014 lines 5-13 “the control module can automatically generate a border coordinate map by taking a start point position where the snow removal device begins to work as an original point according to the information of a working area of a rule input by the input module, and the control module controls the automatic snow removal device to move and work in a border of the working area by using the direction detection device according to the border coordinate map,” teaching working within a defined border)
Regarding Claim 4, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the sensor comprises an optical camera, an infrared camera, an ultraviolet camera, an ultrasound sensor, a radar, a LIDAR, or a combination thereof. (Gao ¶ 0400 lines 6-12 “The snow removal system in the present embodiment comprises a snow blower 100 and a fixed site 800. The fixed site has a detection module and a site wireless communication module, wherein the detection module comprises a laser distance measuring module 820, a cloud deck camera 840 and a sensor configured to measure an angle (for example, a triaxial acceleration sensor),” teaching a fixed camera and a fixed laser distance measuring module analogous to a LIDAR)
Regarding Claim 5, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the sensor is mounted to a body at least temporarily fixed relative to the stretch of land. (Gao ¶ 0400 lines 6-8 “The snow removal system in the present embodiment comprises a snow blower 100 and a fixed site 800. The fixed site has a detection module,” teaching the fixed nature of the site and Fig. 51 showing the site mounted to a body below the camera)
PNG
media_image1.png
636
389
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 5 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the body is one selected from the group consisting of a pole, a wall, a roof, and a tree. (Gao ¶ 0397 lines 13-14 “The monitoring device 600 such as the SMARTPHONE or IPAD is fixed by a support,” teaching in an alternate embodiment the use of an electronic device as a similar monitoring station, showing in Fig. 49 that the “support” is a tripod pole)
Regarding Claim 12, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the identifying marker comprises a machine readable marker enabling the sensor to distinguish the UGV from surrounding stretch of land. (Gao ¶ 0400 lines 22-28 “The top of the snow blower is provided with the identified object 191 having an obvious mark (for example, a specific color or specific shape, or a partially lighting object), the size of the identified object is very small relative to the snow blower, and can be conveniently subjected to image identification,” teaching that the identified object is convenient for image identification, functionally analogous to being machine-readably distinguishable from the surrounding land)
Regarding Claim 13, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 12 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the identifying marker comprises at least portion thereof disposed on top and/or along one or more sides of the vehicle. (Gao ¶ 400 lines 22-24 “The top of the snow blower is provided with the identified object 191 having an obvious mark,” teaching that the identified object is on the top of the snowblower, as shown in Fig. 51)
Regarding Claim 14, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 12 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the identifying marker comprises textural and/or structural characteristics detectable by the sensor. (Gao ¶ 400 lines 22-28 “The top of the snow blower is provided with the identified object 191 having an obvious mark (for example, a specific color or specific shape, or a partially lighting object), the size of the identified object is very small relative to the snow blower, and can be conveniently subjected to image identification,” teaching that the identified object can be identified by shape, a structural characteristic )
Regarding Claim 15, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 12 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the identifying marker comprises a two-dimensional and/or a three-dimensional structure. (Gao ¶ 400 lines 22-28 “The top of the snow blower is provided with the identified object 191 having an obvious mark (for example, a specific color or specific shape, or a partially lighting object), the size of the identified object is very small relative to the snow blower, and can be conveniently subjected to image identification,” teaching that the identified object can be identified by shape, a two-dimensional and/or three-dimensional structural characteristic )
Regarding Claim 16, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 12 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the identifying marker is detectable across the electromagnetic spectrum and/or by ultrasound. (Gao ¶ 0400 lines 22-28 “The top of the snow blower is provided with the identified object 191 having an obvious mark (for example, a specific color or specific shape, or a partially lighting object), the size of the identified object is very small relative to the snow blower, and can be conveniently subjected to image identification,” teaching that the identified object can be identified by color or lighting, which are both detectable across the electromagnetic spectrum)
Regarding Claim 18, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the controller is configured to autonomously operate the UGV within a predetermined range of the sensor based on the navigation signal. (Gao ¶ 0014 lines 5-13 “the control module can automatically generate a border coordinate map by taking a start point position where the snow removal device begins to work as an original point according to the information of a working area of a rule input by the input module, and the control module controls the automatic snow removal device to move and work in a border of the working area by using the direction detection device according to the border coordinate map,” teaching automatic control (autonomously working) within a defined border (predetermined range))
Regarding Claim 19, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the three-dimensional map comprises three-dimensional information relating to a terrain of the stretch of land including objects that are obstacles for motion of the UGV. (Gao ¶ 0254 lines 1-15 “The boundary is the joint name of a border and obstacles. […] The obstacles are the parts or areas where the moving cannot be realized within the working area, for example, indoor sofas and bedside tables or outdoor ponds and flower-stands, similarly, the obstacles can be also tangible or electronic, the tangible obstacles can be formed by the aforesaid obstacles per se,” teaching the inclusion of obstacles where movement cannot be realized within the working area as part of the boundary determination, i.e. previously established mapping)
Regarding Claim 25, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the user-specified task comprises one or more road maintenance processes including snow removal, preventive management, salt or brine spraying, painting, and damage maintenance. (Gao ¶ 0007 lines 1-3 “The technical solution adopted by the present invention to solve the technical problems is as follows: a snow removal device having an automatic working capacity,” teaching the use of the device for snow removal, a claimed road maintenance process.)
Regarding Claim 26, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above and further teaches:
wherein the user-specified task comprises one or more of ground maintenance processes including lawn mowing, bush trimming, snow removal, seeding, aerating, watering, and spraying of a fertilizer, a pesticide and/or a herbicide. (Gao ¶ 0007 lines 1-3 “The technical solution adopted by the present invention to solve the technical problems is as follows: a snow removal device having an automatic working capacity,” teaching the use of the device for snow removal, a claimed ground maintenance process.)
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)7-11 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Wang (US 20210078727, hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding Claim 7, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above. Gao does not teach:
wherein the sensor is positioned higher than a topmost surface of the UGV.
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Wang teaches:
wherein the sensor is positioned higher than a topmost surface of the UGV. (Wang ¶ 0005 lines 1-4 “An aspect of the invention is directed to a method for coupling an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to a vehicle, said method comprising: (a) detecting a marker on the vehicle that differentiates the vehicle from other vehicles;” establishes Wang as teaching a UAV linked to a vehicle detecting a mark on the vehicle, the vehicle and mark analogous to the snow blower and identified object of Gao, and ¶ 0222 “In one example, a user (e.g., operator or passenger of a vehicle 1020b) may wish to gather information about the surrounding environment that the user cannot get while in the vehicle. The user may wish to gather images of the environment surrounding the user. In one example, a traffic jam may have occurred. The user may wish to determine the cause of the traffic jam and/or scout out how bad the traffic jam is. The user may also wish to map out possible alternate routes depending on surrounding traffic. The user may launch a UAV from the vehicle to collect the information. The UAV may include a camera, and may fly ahead of the vehicle. The UAV may be able to capture images of about the cause of the traffic jam and/or possible routes to take. The UAV may be able to capture images that may help the user assess how long the user may be stuck in traffic and/or the extent of the traffic jam. The images may be streamed to the user in real-time. The images may be streamed to a display device within the vehicle. For example, the UAV 1010 may fly above the companion vehicle 1020b and/or other vehicles 1020a, 1020c, 1020d and be able to view from a higher altitude additional information that may not be viewable from within the companion vehicle,” teaching the use of a sensor (camera) remote from the vehicle in the UAV that observes the surrounding area (and the aforementioned mark) from a higher altitude than the vehicle.)
PNG
media_image2.png
359
431
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Gao and Wang are considered analogous because they both relate to observation and identification of vehicles by remote sensors. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixed detection unit for detecting an identified object on an autonomous snowblower of Gao with the simple substitution of Wang’s UAV-mounted camera for the detection unit of Gao. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by gaining a better view of the area and potential obstacles than would be possible from the ground (Wang ¶ 0222).
Regarding Claim 8, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above. Gao does not teach:
wherein the sensor is mounted to a second vehicle that periodically follows the UGV.
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Wang teaches:
wherein the sensor is mounted to a second vehicle that periodically follows the UGV. (Wang ¶ 0005 lines 1-9 “An aspect of the invention is directed to a method for coupling an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to a vehicle, said method comprising: (a) detecting a marker on the vehicle that differentiates the vehicle from other vehicles; (b) generating a command signal, based on the marker, to drive one or more propulsion units of the UAV, thereby controlling a lateral velocity of the UAV to fall within a predetermined range relative to a lateral velocity of the vehicle;” teaching a UAV that identifies a mark on a vehicle being controlled within a particular lateral velocity of the vehicle, i.e. following)
Gao and Wang are considered analogous because they both relate to observation and identification of vehicles by remote sensors. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixed detection unit for detecting an identified object on an autonomous snowblower of Gao with the simple substitution of Wang’s camera on a UAV which is controlled within a particular lateral velocity of the vehicle for the detection unit of Gao. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by gaining a better view of the area and potential obstacles than would be possible from the ground (Wang ¶ 0222).
Regarding Claim 9, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above. Gao does not teach:
wherein the sensor is mounted to a second vehicle that periodically follows the UGV.
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Wang teaches:
wherein the sensor is mounted to an aerial vehicle (Wang ¶ 0005 lines 1-9 “An aspect of the invention is directed to a method for coupling an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to a vehicle, said method comprising: (a) detecting a marker on the vehicle that differentiates the vehicle from other vehicles; (b) generating a command signal, based on the marker, to drive one or more propulsion units of the UAV, thereby controlling a lateral velocity of the UAV to fall within a predetermined range relative to a lateral velocity of the vehicle;” teaching a UAV that identifies a mark on a vehicle)
capable of at least temporarily holding a position relative to the stretch of land. (Wang ¶ 0298 lines 1-12 “The user may send any type of command to the UAV. The command may control the motion of the UAV. The command may control the flight of the UAV. […] The command may be used to control the position, orientation, velocity, angular velocity, acceleration, and/or angular acceleration of the UAV. The command may cause the UAV to increase, decrease, or maintain altitude. The command may cause the UAV to hover in place,” emphasis added, teaching that the UAV is capable of hovering in place, i.e. holding a position relative to a stretch of land)
Gao and Wang are considered analogous because they both relate to observation and identification of vehicles by remote sensors. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixed detection unit for detecting an identified object on an autonomous snowblower of Gao with the simple substitution of Wang’s camera on a UAV capable of hovering in place for the detection unit of Gao. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by gaining a better view of the area and potential obstacles than would be possible from the ground (Wang ¶ 0222).
Regarding Claim 10, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above. Gao does not teach:
wherein the aerial vehicle is one selected from the group consisting of a drone, a balloon, a blimp, an airship, a Zeppelin, a VTOL aircraft and a helicopter.
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Wang teaches:
wherein the aerial vehicle is one selected from the group consisting of a drone, a balloon, a blimp, an airship, a Zeppelin, a VTOL aircraft and a helicopter. (Wang ¶ 0005 lines 1-9 “An aspect of the invention is directed to a method for coupling an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to a vehicle, said method comprising: (a) detecting a marker on the vehicle that differentiates the vehicle from other vehicles; (b) generating a command signal, based on the marker, to drive one or more propulsion units of the UAV, thereby controlling a lateral velocity of the UAV to fall within a predetermined range relative to a lateral velocity of the vehicle;” teaching a UAV (a drone) that identifies a mark on a vehicle, and ¶ 0374 lines 1-5 “In some embodiments, the propulsion mechanisms 1706 can enable the movable object 1700 to take off vertically from a surface or land vertically on a surface without requiring any horizontal movement of the movable object 1700 (e.g., without traveling down a runway),” teaching VTOL capability)
Gao and Wang are considered analogous because they both relate to observation and identification of vehicles by remote sensors. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixed detection unit for detecting an identified object on an autonomous snowblower of Gao with the simple substitution of Wang’s camera on a VTOL UAV for the detection unit of Gao. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by gaining a better view of the area and potential obstacles than would be possible from the ground (Wang ¶ 0222).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Gao and Wang teaches the elements of Claim 9 as described above. Gao does not teach:
wherein the aerial vehicle is a drone tethered to the UGV or a body at least temporarily fixed to the stretch of land.
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Wang teaches:
wherein the aerial vehicle is a drone tethered to the UGV or a body at least temporarily fixed to the stretch of land. (Wang ¶ 0151 lines 8-11 “The docking station may optionally permit an electrical connection 680 to be formed between the UAV and the vehicle. The electrical connection may be a hard-wired connection” teaching a wired (tethered) connection between the UAV and the vehicle, as shown in Fig. 6 )
PNG
media_image3.png
347
469
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Gao and Wang are considered analogous because they both relate to observation and identification of vehicles by remote sensors. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixed detection unit for detecting an identified object on an autonomous snowblower of Gao with the simple substitution of Wang’s camera on a tethered UAV for the detection unit of Gao. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by gaining a better view of the area and potential obstacles than would be possible from the ground (Wang ¶ 0222).
Regarding Claim 20, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above. Gao further teaches:
wherein the sensor is further configured to determine a pose […] of the UGV relative to the stretch of the land based on detection of the identifying marker. (Gao ¶ 0400 lines 41-47 “at this point, recording the laser distance measuring distance L, and a planar offset angle α and a vertical angle θ of the camera, thereby obtaining the three-dimensional polar coordinates of the snow blower in such position. A continuous border track can be obtained by multipoint sampling to form a closed border,”)
Gao does not teach:
[…] and a velocity […]
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Wang teaches:
wherein the sensor is further configured to determine […] a velocity of the UGV […] based on detection of the identifying marker. (Wang ¶ 0011 lines 5-11 “(b) one or more sensors configured to detect a marker on the vehicle; (c) one or more processors, individually or collectively configured to generate a command signal, based on the detected marker, wherein the one or more propulsion units, in response to the command signal, controls a lateral velocity of the UAV to fall within a predetermined range relative to an assessed lateral velocity of the vehicle;” teaching assessing the lateral velocity (speed) of the vehicle to control the UAV based on the marker and speed and ¶ 0104 “In some embodiments, the lateral velocity of the vehicle may be determined. A target lateral velocity may be calculated for the UAV that may fall within the predetermined range. The target lateral velocity may be calculated on board the UAV or on board the vehicle. One or more propulsion units of the UAV may be controlled to cause the UAV to fly at the target velocity and/or within the predetermined range,” teaching determination of the vehicle lateral velocity)
Gao and Wang are considered analogous because they both relate to observation and identification of vehicles by remote sensors. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the camera-based snowblower pose determination of Gao with the simple substitution of Wang’s marker identification and speed determination of the vehicle in order to implement control, analogous to the control elements of Gao, for the speedometer speed control of Gao (Gao ¶0247 lines 63-64). This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by the simple substitution of one known element (Wang’s marker identification and lateral velocity determination) for another known element (Gao’s speedometer speed control) to achieve predictable results (speed determination for speed control), as would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
Regarding Claim 21, the combination of Gao and Wang teaches the elements of Claim 20 as described above. Gao further teaches:
wherein the navigation signal comprises information associated with: objects that are obstacles for motion of the vehicle on the stretch of land, (Gao ¶ 0254 lines 1-15 “The boundary is the joint name of a border and obstacles. […] The obstacles are the parts or areas where the moving cannot be realized within the working area, for example, indoor sofas and bedside tables or outdoor ponds and flower-stands, similarly, the obstacles can be also tangible or electronic, the tangible obstacles can be formed by the aforesaid obstacles per se,” teaching the inclusion of obstacles where movement cannot be realized within the working area as part of the boundary determination, i.e. previously established mapping)
and a prospective path for movement of the UGV, wherein the prospective path is selected to avoid the objects that are obstacles (Gao ¶ 0400 “a solution of border setting and path planning by a three-dimensional polar coordinate solution, i.e., a manner of image tracking, laser distance measuring and angle measuring of a machine-identified object,” teaching border setting and bath planning as described in Claim 1, the border setting including obstacles per ¶ 0254 lines 1-15 as above)
and is based on the user-specified task (Gao ¶ 0247 lines 26-27 “Specifically, as shown in FIGS. 8 and 9, the user manually inputs a snow removal area”)
and the determined pose (Gao ¶ 0400 lines 41-47 “at this point, recording the laser distance measuring distance L, and a planar offset angle α and a vertical angle θ of the camera, thereby obtaining the three-dimensional polar coordinates of the snow blower in such position. A continuous border track can be obtained by multipoint sampling to form a closed border,”)
and velocity of the UGV. (Gao ¶0247 lines 63-64 “The moving distance of the snow throwing machine can be also be realized by setting a speedometer,” as modified by Wang in Claim 20)
Regarding Claim 22, the combination of Gao and Wang teaches the elements of Claim 21 as described above. Gao further teaches:
wherein the sensor is further configured to determine, based on the three-dimensional map, the objects that are obstacles for motion of the UGV on the stretch of land. (Gao ¶ 0254 lines x-x “The boundary is the joint name of a border and obstacles. […] The obstacles are the parts or areas where the moving cannot be realized within the working area, for example, indoor sofas and bedside tables or outdoor ponds and flower-stands, similarly, the obstacles can be also tangible or electronic, the tangible obstacles can be formed by the aforesaid obstacles per se,” teaching the inclusion of obstacles where movement cannot be realized within the working area as part of the boundary determination, i.e. previously established 3D mapping)
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Wang and Trappe (WO 2020200369, hereinafter “Trappe,” all citations and excerpts taken from the attached machine translation).
Regarding Claim 17, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 12 as described above. Gao further teaches:
wherein the identifying marker comprises a […]colored […] (Gao ¶ 0400 lines 22-25 “The top of the snow blower is provided with the identified object 191 having an obvious mark (for example, a specific color”)
Gao does not teach:
[…]multi-colored
and textured
two-dimensional code that is unique to the UGV.
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Wang teaches:
wherein the identifying marker comprises a multi-colored […] two-dimensional code that is unique to the UGV. (Wang ¶ 0203 lines 1-5 “The marker 930c may be visual discernible to the naked eye. In one example, the marker may be a 1D, 2D or 3D barcode. In another example, the marker may be a quick response (QR) code. The marker may be an image, symbol, or any combination of black and white or colored patterns,” teaching 2D, bar- or QR-code, in black and white or colored (i.e. comprising multiple colors), and ¶ 0207 lines x-x “The markers 930a, 930b, 930c, 930d may be distinguishable from one another. This may help distinguish different vehicles 920a, 920b, 920c, 920d from one another. The markers may be distinguishable from one another using a sensor of the UAV. […] For example, if the markers are visual patterns, the visual patterns may each be different from one another. Each vehicle may have a unique or substantially unique visual pattern,” teaching that the markers are unique to the vehicle)
Gao and Wang are considered analogous because they both relate to observation and identification of vehicles by remote sensors. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the colored identifying object of Gao’s snowblower with the simple addition of Wang’s unique, 2D multi-colored coded pattern characteristics of a similar identifying marker to Gao’s identifying object. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by an increased ability to distinguish between multiple vehicles in the environment (Wang ¶ 0207).
The combination of Gao and Wang does not teach:
[…] and textured […]
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Wang teaches:
wherein the identifying marker comprises a […] and textured two-dimensional code […] (Trappe Pg 2 ¶ 11 “An approximately two-dimensional surface of the marker is referred to as a marker effective area, which has very differently reflective and / or light-emitting partial surfaces and which, due to these different emission or reflection properties, is well suited for detecting and recognizing the position marker, for example for determining the position of a robot vehicle. For this purpose, the various partial areas have the highest possible contrast and the best possible recognizable shape, for example in the form of a symbol or a data matrix code, etc,” and Pg 2 ¶ 13 “An approximately two-dimensional surface is to be understood as a surface which, in its overall impression, gives the impression of a a two-dimensional surface, as is the case, for example, with a deep-pile carpet, a lawn, a sieve or a perforated circuit board,” teaching an identifying marker comprising a two-dimensional code with a textured surface (such as carpet, lawn, sieve, or PCD))
Gao, Wang, and Trappe are all considered analogous because they all relate to observation and identification of vehicles by remote sensors. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of the colored identifying object of Gao’s snowblower and Wang’s unique, 2D multi-colored coded pattern characteristics the simple addition of Trappe’s textured surface on a similar 2D identifying code. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by an improved ability to identify the code due to more distinguishable reflective properties of the textured surface (Trappe 2 ¶ 11).
Claim(s) 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Lee (WO 2019004621, hereinafter “Lee,” all citations and excerpts taken from the attached machine translation).
Regarding Claim 23, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 12 as described above. Gao does not teach:
wherein the sensor is configured to generate the navigation signal by: comparing the generated three-dimensional map with an a priori obtained three dimensional map; and determining changes in the stretch of land based on the comparison.
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Lee teaches:
wherein the sensor is configured to generate the navigation signal by: comparing the generated three-dimensional map with an a priori obtained three dimensional map; and determining changes in the stretch of land based on the comparison. (Lee Pg 6 ¶ 10 “4, the information of the corresponding motion that the robot can perform when it is close to a specific entry-restricted area is previously stored in the entry-restricted area information unit 220. Thus, the robot performs a predetermined corresponding motion in a specific entry- can do. Alternatively, when sensing a new entry-inhibiting area, the controller 900 of the robot refers to the corresponding motion for each category of the previously-stored entry-inhibiting area, stores information about the corresponding motion in the entry-restricted area information 220, Can be updated,” and Pg 13 ¶ 9 “The control unit 900 can determine whether the obstacle is a moving obstacle or a fixed obstacle by comparing the vision data at the previous time sensed by the vision sensing unit 140 with the vision data at a predetermined time. Alternatively, it is possible to distinguish the moving obstacle from the fixed obstacle by comparing the sensed values of the lidar sensing unit 110 and the depth camera unit 120, which change with time,” teaching obstacle determination and robot path planning entry restriction based on a comparison of previous data to new data.)
Gao and Lee are considered analogous because they both relate to robotic work vehicle path planning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vision-based obstacle determination for a 3D map of Gao’s snowblower system with the simple addition of Lee’s obstacle determination based on a comparison of previously stored entry-restriction information with new area information to update the entry restrictions. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by improved robot working efficiency (Lee Pg 10 ¶ 3 lines 4-6 “However, according to the present invention, since the entrance restriction area can be confirmed in advance, the cleaning efficiency can be improved, The number of operations to be repeated after the first function is performed can be reduced.”).
Claim(s) 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Friell et al (US 20210368696, hereinafter “Friell,”).
Regarding Claim 24, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above. Gao does not teach:
wherein the user-specified task comprises one or more agricultural processes including tilling, seeding, spraying of a fertilizer, a pesticide and/or a herbicide, and harvesting.
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Friell teaches:
wherein the user-specified task comprises one or more agricultural processes including tilling, seeding, spraying of a fertilizer, a pesticide and/or a herbicide, and harvesting. (Friell ¶ 0026 “Embodiments of the present disclosure provide autonomous ground surface maintenance vehicles and systems, as well as methods of operating (e.g., autonomously or semi-autonomously) the same within a work region (area within which the vehicle will autonomously operate) to assist with identifying and/or repairing damaged areas of a ground surface. For example, the vehicle may be an autonomous turf repair vehicle adapted to detect or otherwise identify an area of damaged turf (a “target area”) such as a divot or rut on a golf course, and to autonomously deliver to the target area a treating material. As used herein, the term “treating material” may include any one, or a combination, of […] seed, particulate matter (e.g., sand, soil, granular fertilizer or chemicals), and liquid (e.g., liquid fertilizer or chemicals). In some embodiments, the vehicle may identify and flag target areas for subsequent treatment, while in other embodiments, the vehicle may autonomously perform the turf repair operation upon identification of the target area,” teaching autonomous seeding and fertilizing, claimed agricultural processes)
Gao and Friell are considered analogous because they both relate to autonomous robotic work vehicles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the snowblower working unit of Gao’s autonomous snowblower system with the simple substitution of Friell’s autonomous grounds maintenance vehicle performing seeding and fertilizing tasks using the control method of Gao. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by the use of a known technique (Gao’s remote control method) to improve similar devices (Gao’s snowblower and Friell’s grounds maintenance robot are similar autonomous work devices that perform different tasks) predictably in the same way (remote path planning and control), as would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143(I)(C)).
Claim(s) 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Gonzalez et al (US 20110094542, hereinafter “Gonzalez”).
Regarding Claim 27, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above. Gao does not teach:
wherein the user-specified task comprises one or more of solar farm maintenance processes including cleaning of solar panels.
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Gonzalez teaches:
wherein the user-specified task comprises one or more of solar farm maintenance processes including cleaning of solar panels. (Gonzalez ¶ 0016-0017 “The object of the present invention is to disclose a new method for cleaning solar panels designed to achieve far greater cleaning efficiency. The present invention also extends to a vehicle equipped with the elements required to perform the cleaning method according to the invention,” teaching a vehicle for cleaning solar panels, a claimed solar farm maintenance process)
Gao and Gonzalez are considered analogous because they both relate to maintenance vehicles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the snowblower working unit of Gao’s autonomous snowblower system with the simple substitution of Gonzalez’s solar panel cleaning vehicle using the autonomous control method of Gao. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by the use of a known technique (Gao’s remote control method) to improve similar devices (Gao’s snowblower and Gonzalez’s solar panel cleaning vehicle are similar maintenance devices that perform different tasks) predictably in the same way (remote path planning and control), as would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143(I)(C)).
Claim(s) 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Prasad et al (WO 2021216830, hereinafter “Prasad”).
Regarding Claim 28, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above. Gao does not teach:
wherein the user-specified task comprises one or more warehouse processes including loading and/or unloading of shelves, collecting objects from shelves, and packaging objects.
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Prasad teaches:
wherein the user-specified task comprises one or more warehouse processes including loading and/or unloading of shelves, collecting objects from shelves, and packaging objects. (Prasad ¶ 0032-0034 lines x-x “FIG. 1 is an example block diagram 100 of a sensor system 102 and a central processing system 104 for monitoring inventory at a storage facility. For example, a storage facility may house inventory, the sensor systems 102 may be configured to monitor the inventory and capture sensor data 106 (e.g., video, images, and the like) associated with the inventory, vehicles, one or more driver(s) of the vehicle, and/or obstructions (e.g., containers, crates, pallets, etc.). In some cases, the sensor system 102 may include one or more vehicle(s) 102(1), charging station(s) 102(2), and/or static sensor(s) 102(3), and the sensor data 106 may be used to navigate the vehicle(s) 102(1) through the storage facility. [0033] In some cases, the central processing system 104 may use the sensor data 106 received from the sensor system 102 process image data using various techniques, such as a machine learned models, to determine inventory counts, quality, status, etc. associated with the inventory within the facility. In some cases, the central processing system 104 may determine locations or cause processing equipment or an operator of the processing equipment to access the inventory at the location for further processing. [0034] In one example, the central processing system 104 may determine, based on the sensor data 106, the oldest inventory meeting a set of reequipments and provide alerts 108 to facility systems 110 or an operator of the processing equipment with the alert 108 to retrieve the inventory and deliver the inventory to an outbound truck or vessel. In some cases, the central processing system 104 may generate control signals 112 for the facility systems 110. For instance, the control signal 112 may cause […] a crane or other unloading/loading equipment to commence a corresponding operation (e.g., unloading or loading of inventory),” and ¶ 0093 lines x-x “FIGS. 1-5 according to some implementations. In this example, the sensor system may be fixed or mobile (e.g., an AAV) within a storage facility or at an unloading point of a facility. In this example, the sensor system, either fixed or mobile (e.g., associated with a land-based or AAV within the facility), may capture sensor and image data associated with the contents of the shelves 602 as shown. For instance, in this example, the sensor data may be input into one or more machine learned models that are configured to extract data, such as shelf location, packaging or labels on each item, a number of items, and the like. The extracted data may then be used to send instructions for packing, re-location of merchandise, re-ordering of inventory, and/or loading of a vehicle” teaching a control system with static cameras for monitoring work vehicles and shelf inventory in a facility inventory system (warehouse) that controls the work vehicles to perform unloading or loading of inventory on the shelves, packing, relocation of merchandise, and loading of a vehicle, which are claimed warehouse processes)
Gao and Prasad are considered analogous because they both relate to autonomous control of work vehicles based on static sensor information. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the snowblower working unit of Gao’s autonomous snowblower system with the simple substitution of Prasad’s inventory operations using the autonomous control method of Gao. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated by the use of a known technique (Gao’s remote control method) to improve similar devices (Gao’s snowblower and Prasad’s inventory operations) predictably in the same way (remote path planning and control), as would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143(I)(C)).
Claim(s) 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Levinson et al (US 9612123, hereinafter “Levinson”).
Regarding Claim 29, Gao teaches the elements of Claim 1 as described above. Gao further teaches:
wherein the three-dimensional map comprises map elements containing attributes including […] depth information. (Gao ¶ 0400 lines 30-47 “The setting manner for the working area is as follows: enabling the snow blower to be on the fixed site, and enabling the camera to face front as an original point of the three-dimensional polar coordinates; remotely controlling […] the snow blower for a circle along the border to be swept, and ensuring that no people or other objects shield the snow blower from identifying the identified object in the advancing process; adjusting the camera on the fixed site in such process, […] at this point, recording the laser distance measuring distance L, and a planar offset angle α and a vertical angle θ of the camera, thereby obtaining the three-dimensional polar coordinates of the snow blower in such position. A continuous border track can be obtained by multipoint sampling to form a closed border,” teaching recording of laser measuring distance analogous to the claimed depth information)
Gao does not teach:
[…] color information and […]
Within the same field of endeavor as Gao, Levinson teaches:
wherein the three-dimensional map comprises map elements containing attributes including color information (Levinson Col 41 lines 21-34 “Integrator 3651 may be configured to generate 3-D models of a cityscape (or any external object feature) as probabilistic maps, […] In some examples, this or any other data structure may also include a number of cells for storing 3-D map data, such as color data (e.g., RGB values or other color space values)” teaching storage of color data as part of 3D map data)
Gao and Levinson are considered analogous because they both relate to autonomous control of work vehicles based on static sensor information. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the snowblower working unit of Gao’s autonomous snowblower system with the simple addition of Levinson’s storing 3D map data including color data. This modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as motivated an improved ability to distinguish map data from the identified object color taught by Gao, as would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 7, 12, 13, and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent Application No. 19210605 in view of Gao. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
The patentably indistinguishable elements of the co-pending applications are related below:
Application
Instant Application
Co-pending Application
App. No.
18853313
19210605
Instant Claim No.
Instant Claim Element
Co-pending Claim No.
Co-Pending Claim Element
1
A system for navigating an unmanned ground vehicle (UGV), comprising: a UGV
1
A robot comprising:
1
comprising a controller configured to receive a navigation signal and operate the UGV in accordance with the navigation signal,
1
and cause the robot to operate along the determined operating path.
1
the UGV having an identifying marker provided thereon;
1
an optical marker
1
a sensor spaced apart from the UGV and at least temporarily fixed relative to a stretch of land on which the UGV is to operate, the sensor being configured to: obtain a three-dimensional map of the stretch of land,
1
a receiver configured to receive, from an image sensor, a top-down image of an area of interest surrounding the robot within a property
Gao ¶ 0051 lines 8-10
and ¶ 0400 lines 30-47
See Claim 1 102 rejection
An image sensor with a top-down view of a robot and area of interest around the robot is necessarily spaced apart from the robot. Gao teaches the elements of a temporarily fixed sensor and a three-dimensional map as explained previously in the Claim 1 102 rejection.
1
generate the navigation signal based on the three-dimensional map
1
determine an operating path for the robot within the area of interest so as to avoid the obstacles,
1
and a user- specified task,
Gao ¶ 0247 lines 26-27
“Specifically, as shown in FIGS. 8 and 9, the user manually inputs a snow removal area”
1
and transmit the navigation signal to the controller.
1
and cause the robot to operate along the determined operating path.
7
The system of claim 1, wherein the sensor is positioned higher than a topmost surface of the UGV.
1
the top-down image including the top-view image of the robot;
12
The system of claim 1, wherein the identifying marker comprises a machine readable marker enabling the sensor to distinguish the UGV from surrounding stretch of land.
1
and a processor configured to: distinguish the robot from structural features on the property
13
The system of claim 12, wherein the identifying marker comprises at least portion thereof disposed on top and/or along one or more sides of the vehicle.
1
an optical marker disposed to be visible in a top-view image of the robot;
19
The system of claim 1, wherein the three-dimensional map comprises three-dimensional information relating to a terrain of the stretch of land including objects that are obstacles for motion of the UGV.
1
determine, based on the top-down image, a position and an orientation of the robot and the structural features relative to the property, determine, among the structural features, a subset of features classified as obstacles inhibiting an operation of the robot as the robot moves within the area of interest,
US Application No. 19210605 with Gao are analogous because they both relate to identification and control of robots using external sensors. Combining the determination of an operation path based on a top-down camera view of the robot of US Application No. 19210605 with Gao’s fixed camera, 3D map, and user-specified task of snow blowing an area would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as motivated by applying a known technique (the fixed camera, 3D map, and application of the navigation system to a user-specified working task such as snow blowing) to a known device ready for improvement (the top-down camera-based navigation of US Application No. 19210605) to yield predictable results (One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the techniques of Gao would apply the robot of the application to a suitable task) [MPEP 2143(I)(D)].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY E GLADE whose telephone number is (703)756-1502. The examiner can normally be reached 4-5-9 7:30-16:30.
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, Kito Robinson can be reached at (571) 270-3921. 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.
/ZACHARY E. F. GLADE/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/KITO R ROBINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664