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 .
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 3, 18 is/are objected to because of the following informalities: wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a first water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water to a first water-sprinkling area of the work place and a second water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water to a second water-sprinkling area of the work place larger than the first water-sprinkling area would be better understood as wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a first water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water [[to]] in a first water-sprinkling area of the work place and a second water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water [[to]] in a second water-sprinkling area of the work place, wherein the second water-sprinkling area is larger than the first water-sprinkling area. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) 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;
(B) 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”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: input data acquisition unit that acquires…; water-sprinkling condition decision unit that decides…; water-sprinkling condition generation unit that generates…; haul condition generation unit that generates…; an expected time calculation unit that calculates…; target area designation unit that designates… in claims 1-16.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Applicant’s specification [0013]: management device 14 includes a computer system, [0014]: control device 17 includes a computer system, [0015]: control device 18 includes a computer system, [0016]: control device 19 includes a computer system, [0098]: computer system 1000 includes a processor 1001, [0114]-[0115]: hardware.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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(s) 1-20 is/are 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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 17-19 recite the terms decides and deciding are interpreted to be indefinite. It appears unclear to the broadest reasonable interpretation required for a unit to decide and deciding. Accordingly, decide and deciding are interpreted as determine and determining.
Claim 2 recites the limitation a water-sprinkling condition generation unit that generates the water-sprinkling condition. It appears unclear to the difference between decides a water-sprinkling condition of an unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle and generates the water-sprinkling condition in light that the condition may include a path (see at least instant specification [0047], claim 15: wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a water-sprinkling path). The deciding and generating appear to be performed by units/modules that are performed by a computer in light of the instant specification and drawings Fig. 5.
Claims 3, 18 recite the limitation “wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a first water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water to a first water-sprinkling area of the work place and a second water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water to a second water-sprinkling area of the work place larger than the first water-sprinkling area”. However, it appears unclear that the single condition includes a plurality of conditions in light of claim 1 introduced decides…a water-sprinkling condition.
Claims 6-7, 10-11 recite “a work place”. However, it appears unclear to whether a work place is the same or different work place as a work place introduced in claim 1.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area to include each of a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle for which the expected time is calculated and a haul path of a past vehicle indicating an unmanned haul vehicle that traveled the work place in the past before the target vehicle”. It appears unclear to whether a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle refers to that the target vehicle is the unmanned haul vehicle or is a different unmanned haul vehicle. It appears unclear to whether an unmanned haul vehicle that traveled the work place in the past before the target vehicle is the same or different vehicle than a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle. Claim 11 recites a similar limitation regarding a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle and a future vehicle indicating an unmanned haul vehicle.
Claim 15 recites “wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a water-sprinkling path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle, the water-sprinkling path that is able to be generated by the water-sprinkling condition generation unit includes a manually generated path generated based on path input data from an input device, and an automatically generated path generated based on a haul path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned haul vehicle or a water-sprinkling target area designated in the work place, and the water-sprinkling condition generation unit does not generate the automatically generated path when the manually generated path is generated”. It is unclear whether the water-sprinkling path is generated or not in light of the language that “is able to be generated”. Also, it appears unclear to whether the water-sprinkling path includes one of or both of the manually generated path and the automatically generated path because it is unclear that a single path may include two paths. It appears unclear that the water-sprinkling condition generation unit does not generate the automatically generated path when the manually generated path is generated in light of the water-sprinkling path generating by the water-sprinkling condition generation unit and that the water-sprinkling path appears to include both paths.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
A claim that recites an abstract idea, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon is directed to a judicial exception. Abstract ideas include the following groupings of subject matter, when recited as such in a claim limitation: (a) Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations; (b) Certain methods of organizing human activity – fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions); and (c) Mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP 2106.
Even when a judicial element is recited in the claim, an additional claim element(s) that integrates the judicial exception into a practical application of that exception renders the claim eligible under §101. A claim that integrates a judicial exception into a practical application will apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception. The following examples are indicative that an additional element or combination of elements may integrate the judicial exception into a practical application:
the additional element(s) reflects an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field;
the additional element(s) that applies or uses a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition;
the additional element(s) implements a judicial exception with, or uses a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim;
the additional element(s) effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and
the additional element(s) applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
Examples in which the judicial exception has not been integrated into a practical application include:
the additional element(s) merely recites the words ‘‘apply it’’ (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea;
the additional element(s) adds insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; and
the additional element does no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
See MPEP 2106.
101 Analysis – Step 1
Claims 1, 17 are directed to a system and method. Therefore, the claims are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the MPEP 2106, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the following groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claim(s) 1 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea (bolded below) and will be used as a representative claims for the remainder of the 101 rejection.
Claim 1 recites:
an input data acquisition unit that acquires condition input data from an input device; and
a water-sprinkling condition decision unit that decides, based on the condition input data, a water-sprinkling condition of an unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle in a work place where an unmanned haul vehicle travels.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers performance of the limitation in the human mind. For example, the limitation(s) in the context of this claim encompasses a person determining or observing a condition or activity of a work vehicle among a fleet.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the MPEP 2106, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. As noted in the MPEP 2106, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, the additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitation” while the bolded portions continue to represent the abstract idea):
Claim 1 recites:
an input data acquisition unit that acquires condition input data from an input device; and
a water-sprinkling condition decision unit that decides, based on the condition input data, a water-sprinkling condition of an unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle in a work place where an unmanned haul vehicle travels.
For the following reason(s), the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding the additional limitations, the examiner submits that these limitations are additional elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components and/or insignificant extra-solution activities that merely use a computer to perform the process. The additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The deciding and condition are interpreted under broadest reasonable interpretation and may be determined data to be outputted. The claim does not appear to include controlling, via a processor, sprinkling of the water by the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle or controlling, via the processor, the movement of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. The additional limitation steps are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general means of gathering data, transmitting signals), and amounts to mere data gathering and storing and transmitting do not add a meaningful limitation to the process (MPEP 2106.05(g) v. Consulting and updating an activity log, Ultramercial, 772 F.3d at 715, 112 USPQ2d at 1754), which are forms of insignificant extra-solution activities. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05). The additional limitations merely describe how to generally apply the otherwise mental judgements in a generic or general purpose vehicle environment. The additional limitations are recited at a high level of generality and merely automates the steps. Accordingly additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
Regarding Step 2B of the MPEP 2106, representative independent claim does not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to nothing more than applying the exception using generic computer components. Generally applying an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Further, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. The additional limitations do not provide any indication that the additional elements are anything other than a conventional computer within a vehicle. Also, MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, INC., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), and Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); and OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93 indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network, receiving or transmitting data over a network, and storing and retrieving information in memory are a well-understood, routine, and conventional functions when claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). Further, the Federal Circuit in Trading Techs. Int’l v. IBGLLC, 921 F.3d1084,1093(Fed. Cir.2019), and Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Co., 850 F.3d1315, 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2017), for example, indicated that the mere displaying of data is a well understood, routine, and conventional function.
The claim(s) do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim(s) is/are not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-16, 18-20 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claim(s) to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of dependent claims are directed toward additional aspects of the judicial exception and/or additional elements that amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and merely automates the steps. The additional limitations are recited at a high level of generality and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity; the additional limitations are well-understood, routine, and conventional activity because the specification does not provide any indication that the additional elements are anything other than a conventional computer components. The claim(s) do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Further, MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, INC., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well-understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner. Furthermore, the Federal Circuit in Trading Techs. Int’l v. IBGLLC, 921 F.3d1084,1093(Fed. Cir.2019), and Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Co., 850 F.3d1315, 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2017), for example, indicated that the mere displaying of data is a well understood, routine, and conventional function. Moreover, mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the dependent claims are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of the independent claim.
Therefore, claim(s) 1-20 is/are ineligible under 35 USC 101.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9, 12-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20110288769 (Gudat).
As per claims 1, 17, Gudat discloses a management system of a work site, the system comprising:
an input data acquisition unit that acquires condition input data from an input device (see at least Gudat [0046]: fluid delivery controller may control fluid delivery system 326 to spray fluid in response to commands received from an operator via operator interface system 322); and
a water-sprinkling condition decision unit that decides, based on the condition input data, a water-sprinkling condition of an unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle in a work place where an unmanned haul vehicle travels (see at least Gudat [0025]: autonomous…unmanned…machines…haul trucks… mobile machines 102 may travel along roads 104 (e.g., haul roads), [0026]: worksite 100 may include one or more mobile fluid delivery machines 106, such as a fleet of fluid delivery machines 106… fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on roads 104 to deliver (e.g., spray) fluid to the worksite surface to control worksite dust conditions, [0026]: fluid delivery controller may control fluid delivery system 326 to spray fluid in response to commands received from an operator via operator interface system 322, Examiner note: the units appear to be modules of a computer processor see instant specification [0013]-[0016], [0098], [0114]-[0115] and thus the controller of Gudat also includes modules capable to perform the operations as described).
As per claim 2, Gudat discloses a water-sprinkling condition generation unit that generates the water-sprinkling condition (Gudat [0046]: fluid delivery machine 106 may include a fluid delivery system 326 configured to deliver fluid, such as water and/or other dust suppressant, to the worksite surface).
As per claims 3, 18, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a first water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water to a first water-sprinkling area of the work place (see at least Gudat [0027]: fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on a route including one or more paths to treat the route with fluid to control dust conditions or to condition the route for certain operations, [0029]: certain spray heads 202 may be turned on or off depending upon the locations of oncoming traffic, worksite personnel, work areas, etc., relative to the position and/or heading of fluid delivery machine 106) and a second water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water to a second water-sprinkling area of the work place (see at least [0027]: fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on a route including one or more paths to treat the route with fluid to control dust conditions or to condition the route for certain operations…set of sequential paths, [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments), and
the water-sprinkling condition decision unit decides at least one of the first water-sprinkling condition and the second water-sprinkling condition as the water-sprinkling condition (see at least Gudat [0027]: fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on a route including one or more paths to treat the route with fluid to control dust conditions or to condition the route for certain operations, [0029]: certain spray heads 202 may be turned on or off depending upon the locations of oncoming traffic, worksite personnel, work areas, etc., relative to the position and/or heading of fluid delivery machine 106, [0070]: path segments, [0076]: path width information 418 may indicate the width (e.g., average width) of the path segment corresponding to the path segment ID 404 in units of length, as a rating (e.g., narrow, medium, or wide), as an overall spray surface area, [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments, [0084]: Fluid delivery controller 372 may determine the average values, for example, by weighting and averaging the values of the path segment characteristics 410 for each path segment in the path according to the surface area and/or length of each path segment),
a second water-sprinkling area of the work place larger than the first water-sprinkling area (see at least Gudat [0070]: path A-B may be 2000 meters long and divided into 200 10-meter segments. Accordingly, in one embodiment, path segment IDs 404 may identify the path segments based on their sequence in the path (e.g., segment 1, segment 2, etc.), [0071]: Start points 406 and end points 408 may be specified in coordinates of latitude and longitude, worksite coordinates, [0076]: Path width information 418 may indicate a width of the path segments corresponding to the segment IDs 404…path width information 418 may indicate the width (e.g., average width) of the path segment corresponding to the path segment ID 404 in units of length, as a rating (e.g., narrow, medium, or wide), as an overall spray surface area, [0082], Fig. 4; Examiner note: it appears that the paths/segments may have lengths and different widths).
As per claims 4, 19, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a third water-sprinkling condition in which water is not sprinkled (see at least Gudat [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments), and
the water-sprinkling condition decision unit decides at least one of the first water-sprinkling condition, the second water-sprinkling condition, and the third water-sprinkling condition as the water-sprinkling condition (see at least Gudat [0027]: fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on a route including one or more paths to treat the route with fluid to control dust conditions or to condition the route for certain operations, [0029]: certain spray heads 202 may be turned on or off depending upon the locations of oncoming traffic, worksite personnel, work areas, etc., relative to the position and/or heading of fluid delivery machine 106, [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments).
As per claim 9, Gudat discloses a target area designation unit that designates the second water-sprinkling area in the work place, wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates a second water-sprinkling condition based on the second water-sprinkling area designed by the target area designation unit (see at least Gudat [0027]: fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on a route including one or more paths to treat the route with fluid to control dust conditions or to condition the route for certain operations, [0029]: certain spray heads 202 may be turned on or off depending upon the locations of oncoming traffic, worksite personnel, work areas, etc., relative to the position and/or heading of fluid delivery machine 106, [0070]: path segments, [0076]: path width information 418 may indicate the width (e.g., average width) of the path segment corresponding to the path segment ID 404 in units of length, as a rating (e.g., narrow, medium, or wide), as an overall spray surface area, [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments, [0084]: Fluid delivery controller 372 may determine the average values, for example, by weighting and averaging the values of the path segment characteristics 410 for each path segment in the path according to the surface area and/or length of each path segment).
As per claim 12, Gudat discloses wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area based on an outer shape of the work place (see at least [0067]: worksite map database 360 may contain information about the paths on worksite 100, such as the location, position, shape, and/or form of roads 104. Worksite map database 360 may also contain information identifying the location and/or boundaries of the paths (e.g., intersections), Fig. 1).
As per claim 13, Gudat discloses wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area based on designated input data from an input device (see at least Gudat [0044]: worksite control facility 112 to determine a fluid delivery route and/or an amount of fluid to deliver to the route, [0082]: the worksite manager may decide that certain paths or path segments should be zoned for modified or restricted fluid delivery).
As per claim 14, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a water-sprinkling path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle (see at least Gudat [0027]: a "route" refers to a set of sequential paths a fluid delivery machine 106 travels while delivering fluid to the worksite surface, [0111]: path ID 502 may identify path A-B, path B-C, path B-D, or any other path on worksite 100 using a suitable identifier (e.g., "A-B," "Path 1," etc.), [0112]: path segment IDs 404 may identify the path segments based on their sequence in the path (e.g., segment 1, segment 2, etc.)), and
the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the water-sprinkling path such that the entire second water-sprinkling area is sprinkled with water by the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle (see at least Gudat [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments).
As per claim 15, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a water-sprinkling path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle (see at least Gudat [0036]: information gathered by the onboard machine operations sensors may be used by fluid delivery system 326 and/or by worksite control facility 112 to determine a fluid delivery route and/or an amount of fluid to deliver to the route, [0044], [0049]: fluid delivery system 326 may begin spraying the fluid at the appropriate rate when fluid delivery machine 106 enters a particular paths specified by the mission instructions),
the water-sprinkling path that is able to be generated by the water-sprinkling condition generation unit includes a manually generated path generated based on path input data from an input device (see at least [0066]: user interface system 358 may be utilized by a worksite manager to supervise or control operations on worksite 100, [0186]: Using an input device associated with user interface system 358--such as a keyboard, mouse, or touchscreen--the worksite administrator may select a sequence of paths to create a route for a fluid delivery mission…as the worksite administrator selects the paths to create a route, application 1300 may provide a recommendation the next path in the sequence…After selecting a desired route for the mission, the worksite administrator may select an option 1304 to choose a fluid delivery machine 106 to dispatch on the mission), and
an automatically generated path generated based on a haul path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned haul vehicle or a water-sprinkling target area designated in the work place (see at least [0036]: information gathered by the onboard machine operations sensors may be used by fluid delivery system 326 and/or by worksite control facility 112 to determine a fluid delivery route and/or an amount of fluid to deliver to the route, [0147]: fluid delivery controller 372 may identify paths on worksite 100 eligible for fluid delivery…fluid delivery controller 372 may generate a listing of all paths on worksite 100. Fluid delivery controller 372 may then remove from the listing any paths that are excluded from fluid delivery, such as paths associated with roads 104 that are closed or no longer in use), and
the water-sprinkling condition generation unit does not generate the automatically generated path when the manually generated path is generated (see at least [0036]: information gathered by the onboard machine operations sensors may be used by fluid delivery system 326 and/or by worksite control facility 112 to determine a fluid delivery route and/or an amount of fluid to deliver to the route, [0146]: process 800 may perform automatically without any input or intervention by the worksite manager, [0186]: After selecting a desired route for the mission, the worksite administrator may select an option 1304 to choose a fluid delivery machine 106 to dispatch on the mission, [0192]: By providing a system for automatically analyzing the fluid delivery requirements of various paths on the worksite in view of a variety of environmental parameters, operational parameters, surface characteristics, and/or other monitored factors, the fluid delivery machines may be automatically dispatched as needed to provide efficient treatment of the worksite).
As per claim 16, Gudat discloses wherein the work place includes at least one of a loading station where loading equipment loads a load onto the unmanned haul vehicle and a soil discharging station where the unmanned haul vehicle discharges the load (see at least Gudat [0079]: at a mining site 100, excavators and loaders (not shown) may cooperate to load haul trucks 102 with material (e.g., ore) from a stockpile 118. The haul trucks 102 may then carry the material to a designated location, such a loading platform of a train that transports the material to a distributor. In performing these operations, the haul trucks 102 may usually travel on roads 104 around or near stockpile 118).
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) 3-4, 9, 13-14, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gudat in view of US 20240018870 (Banham).
As per claims 3, 18, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a first water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water to a first water-sprinkling area of the work place (see at least [0027]: fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on a route including one or more paths to treat the route with fluid to control dust conditions or to condition the route for certain operations, [0029]: certain spray heads 202 may be turned on or off depending upon the locations of oncoming traffic, worksite personnel, work areas, etc., relative to the position and/or heading of fluid delivery machine 106) and a second water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water to a second water-sprinkling area of the work place (see at least [0027]: fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on a route including one or more paths to treat the route with fluid to control dust conditions or to condition the route for certain operations…set of sequential paths, [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments), and
the water-sprinkling condition decision unit decides at least one of the first water-sprinkling condition and the second water-sprinkling condition as the water-sprinkling condition (see at least [0027]: fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on a route including one or more paths to treat the route with fluid to control dust conditions or to condition the route for certain operations, [0029]: certain spray heads 202 may be turned on or off depending upon the locations of oncoming traffic, worksite personnel, work areas, etc., relative to the position and/or heading of fluid delivery machine 106, [0070]: path segments, [0076]: path width information 418 may indicate the width (e.g., average width) of the path segment corresponding to the path segment ID 404 in units of length, as a rating (e.g., narrow, medium, or wide), as an overall spray surface area, [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments, [0084]: Fluid delivery controller 372 may determine the average values, for example, by weighting and averaging the values of the path segment characteristics 410 for each path segment in the path according to the surface area and/or length of each path segment),
a second water-sprinkling area of the work place larger than the first water-sprinkling area (see at least [0070]: path A-B may be 2000 meters long and divided into 200 10-meter segments. Accordingly, in one embodiment, path segment IDs 404 may identify the path segments based on their sequence in the path (e.g., segment 1, segment 2, etc.), [0071]: Start points 406 and end points 408 may be specified in coordinates of latitude and longitude, worksite coordinates, [0076]: Path width information 418 may indicate a width of the path segments corresponding to the segment IDs 404…path width information 418 may indicate the width (e.g., average width) of the path segment corresponding to the path segment ID 404 in units of length, as a rating (e.g., narrow, medium, or wide), as an overall spray surface area, [0082], Fig. 4; Examiner note: it appears that the paths/segments may have lengths and different widths).
Should it be found that Gudat does not explicitly disclose a first water-sprinkling area, a second water-sprinkling area, and a second water-sprinkling area of the work a second water-sprinkling area of the work place larger than the first water-sprinkling area,
Banham teaches a second water-sprinkling condition for sprinkling water to a second water-sprinkling area of the work place larger than the first water-sprinkling area (see at least abstract: device may predict an expected level of moisture of the section of the ground surface at an estimated time of arrival of an autonomous machine with a water dispensing unit and determine an amount of water to be dispensed by the autonomous machine at the section of the ground surface…provide a command, to the autonomous machine, to cause the autonomous machine to dispense the amount of water to the section of the ground surface, [0024]: Moisture management device 120 may perform the actions described herein for multiple sections of ground surface 130. In some situations, each section of ground surface 130 may be of a same size. Alternatively, ground surface 130 may include sections of different sizes. As an example, a section of ground surface 130 may cover an area of one square meter. In some situations, the section of ground surface 130 may cover an area of a different size. For example, a section of ground surface 130 may cover an area of two square meters, five square meters, ten square meters, among other examples…area may increase in order to more easily support very large active mines where the total number of areas are large. For example, by switching to 2 square meters, processing and memory requirements may be reduced by a factor of 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Banham with a reasonable expectation of success in order to more easily support large work sites.
As per claims 4, 19, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a third water-sprinkling condition in which water is not sprinkled (see at least [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments,), and
the water-sprinkling condition decision unit decides at least one of the first water-sprinkling condition, the second water-sprinkling condition, and the third water-sprinkling condition as the water-sprinkling condition (see at least [0027]: fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on a route including one or more paths to treat the route with fluid to control dust conditions or to condition the route for certain operations, [0029]: certain spray heads 202 may be turned on or off depending upon the locations of oncoming traffic, worksite personnel, work areas, etc., relative to the position and/or heading of fluid delivery machine 106, [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments).
As per claim 9, Gudat discloses a target area designation unit that designates the second water-sprinkling area in the work place, wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates a second water-sprinkling condition based on the second water-sprinkling area designed by the target area designation unit (see at least Gudat [0027]: fluid delivery machines 106 may be dispatched on a route including one or more paths to treat the route with fluid to control dust conditions or to condition the route for certain operations, [0029]: certain spray heads 202 may be turned on or off depending upon the locations of oncoming traffic, worksite personnel, work areas, etc., relative to the position and/or heading of fluid delivery machine 106, [0070]: path segments, [0076]: path width information 418 may indicate the width (e.g., average width) of the path segment corresponding to the path segment ID 404 in units of length, as a rating (e.g., narrow, medium, or wide), as an overall spray surface area, [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments, [0084]: Fluid delivery controller 372 may determine the average values, for example, by weighting and averaging the values of the path segment characteristics 410 for each path segment in the path according to the surface area and/or length of each path segment).
Further, Banham teaches a target area designation unit that designates the second water-sprinkling area in the work place, wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates a second water-sprinkling condition based on the second water-sprinkling area designed by the target area designation unit (see at least abstract: device may predict an expected level of moisture of the section of the ground surface at an estimated time of arrival of an autonomous machine with a water dispensing unit and determine an amount of water to be dispensed by the autonomous machine at the section of the ground surface…provide a command, to the autonomous machine, to cause the autonomous machine to dispense the amount of water to the section of the ground surface, [0024]: Moisture management device 120 may perform the actions described herein for multiple sections of ground surface 130. In some situations, each section of ground surface 130 may be of a same size. Alternatively, ground surface 130 may include sections of different sizes. As an example, a section of ground surface 130 may cover an area of one square meter. In some situations, the section of ground surface 130 may cover an area of a different size. For example, a section of ground surface 130 may cover an area of two square meters, five square meters, ten square meters, among other examples…area may increase in order to more easily support very large active mines where the total number of areas are large. For example, by switching to 2 square meters, processing and memory requirements may be reduced by a factor of 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Banham with a reasonable expectation of success in order to more easily support large work sites.
As per claim 13, Gudat discloses wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area based on designated input data from an input device (see at least Gudat [0044]: worksite control facility 112 to determine a fluid delivery route and/or an amount of fluid to deliver to the route, [0082]: the worksite manager may decide that certain paths or path segments should be zoned for modified or restricted fluid delivery).
As per claim 14, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a water-sprinkling path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle (see at least Gudat [0027]: a "route" refers to a set of sequential paths a fluid delivery machine 106 travels while delivering fluid to the worksite surface, [0111]: path ID 502 may identify path A-B, path B-C, path B-D, or any other path on worksite 100 using a suitable identifier (e.g., "A-B," "Path 1," etc.), [0112]: path segment IDs 404 may identify the path segments based on their sequence in the path (e.g., segment 1, segment 2, etc.)), and
the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the water-sprinkling path such that the entire second water-sprinkling area is sprinkled with water by the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle (see at least Gudat [0082]: Zoning information 424 may indicate whether the path segments corresponding to the path segment IDs 404 are zoned for decreased or increased fluid delivery…path segments near buildings, machinery, worksite infrastructure, worksite personnel, work projects, etc. may be zoned for reduced or restricted fluid delivery, as spraying fluid in these segments).
Claim(s) 5, 8, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gudat in view of Banham, and further in view of Borland and Maeda.
As per claims 5, 20, Gudat discloses mobile machines 102 (may include haul trucks) may travel along roads 104 (e.g., haul roads) or other paths between excavation locations and haul trucks 102 may carry the material to a designated location (see at least [0025], [0079]) but does not explicitly disclose a haul condition generation unit that generates haul traveling data indicating a traveling condition including a haul path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned haul vehicle, wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on the haul path.
However, Borland teaches a haul condition generation unit that generates haul traveling data indicating a traveling condition including a haul path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned haul vehicle (see at least Borland [0013]: One or more travel paths 18 may generally extend between load location 14 and dump location 16, and different zones may be established along travel path(s) 18 that can be used to regulate machine travel, [0014]: a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck)…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0017]: processing may include, among other things, determining a current location of each machine 12, a distance between machines 12, speeds of machines 12, projected travel paths of machines 12, and/or locations of machines 12 relative to areas of worksite 10 (e.g., relative to no-overtaking zones 19)),
wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on the haul path (see at least Borland [0014]: a first type of machine (e.g., an excavator) 12a may be stationed at load location 14 and assigned to fill a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck) 12b with material. A third type of machine (e.g., a dozer, a motor grader, a water truck, and/or a service vehicle) 12c may be tasked with traveling up and down travel path(s) 18 to condition travel path(s) 18…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0015]: When a faster machine 12 follows a slower machine 12, the faster machine 12 may suffer productivity and/or efficiency losses. Accordingly, there may be a periodic need for the faster machine 12 to overtake the slower machine 12 when the machines are outside of no-overtaking zones 19, [0016]: each machine 12 (haul truck shown by way of example only) may be equipped with components of an overtaking control system 20 that facilitate control of overtaking events, [0027]: controller 28 may determine if the host machine 12 is currently within a no-overtaking zone 19 or if the projected path of the host machine 12 overlaps with a no-overtaking zone 19 (Step 325), Examiner note: instant specification recites that the water-sprinkling condition may include a path, see at least instant specification [0047]: water-sprinkling condition includes the water-sprinkling path 41 of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Borland with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve productivity and efficiency.
As per claim 8, Gudat does not explicitly disclose wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a water-sprinkling path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle, the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the water-sprinkling path such that at least a part of the haul path and the water-sprinkling path coincide with each other.
However, Borland discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a water-sprinkling path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle (see at least Borland [0014]: a first type of machine (e.g., an excavator) 12a may be stationed at load location 14 and assigned to fill a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck) 12b with material. A third type of machine (e.g., a dozer, a motor grader, a water truck, and/or a service vehicle) 12c may be tasked with traveling up and down travel path(s) 18 to condition travel path(s) 18…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0015]: When a faster machine 12 follows a slower machine 12, the faster machine 12 may suffer productivity and/or efficiency losses. Accordingly, there may be a periodic need for the faster machine 12 to overtake the slower machine 12 when the machines are outside of no-overtaking zones 19, [0016]: each machine 12 (haul truck shown by way of example only) may be equipped with components of an overtaking control system 20 that facilitate control of overtaking events, [0027]: controller 28 may determine if the host machine 12 is currently within a no-overtaking zone 19 or if the projected path of the host machine 12 overlaps with a no-overtaking zone 19 (Step 325), Examiner note: instant specification recites that the water-sprinkling condition may include a path, see at least instant specification [0047]: water-sprinkling condition includes the water-sprinkling path 41 of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle 3), and
the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the water-sprinkling path such that at least a part of the haul path and the water-sprinkling path coincide with each other (see at least Borland [0014]: a first type of machine (e.g., an excavator) 12a may be stationed at load location 14 and assigned to fill a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck) 12b with material. A third type of machine (e.g., a dozer, a motor grader, a water truck, and/or a service vehicle) 12c may be tasked with traveling up and down travel path(s) 18 to condition travel path(s) 18…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0015]: When a faster machine 12 follows a slower machine 12, the faster machine 12 may suffer productivity and/or efficiency losses. Accordingly, there may be a periodic need for the faster machine 12 to overtake the slower machine 12 when the machines are outside of no-overtaking zones 19, [0016]: each machine 12 (haul truck shown by way of example only) may be equipped with components of an overtaking control system 20 that facilitate control of overtaking events, [0027]: controller 28 may determine if the host machine 12 is currently within a no-overtaking zone 19 or if the projected path of the host machine 12 overlaps with a no-overtaking zone 19 (Step 325), Examiner note: instant specification recites that the water-sprinkling condition may include a path, see at least instant specification [0047]: water-sprinkling condition includes the water-sprinkling path 41 of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Borland with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve productivity and efficiency.
Claim(s) 5, 8, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gudat in view of Banham, and further in view of Borland.
As per claims 5, 20, Gudat discloses mobile machines 102 (may include haul trucks) may travel along roads 104 (e.g., haul roads) or other paths between excavation locations and haul trucks 102 may carry the material to a designated location (see at least [0025], [0079]) but does not explicitly disclose a haul condition generation unit that generates haul traveling data indicating a traveling condition including a haul path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned haul vehicle, wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on the haul path.
However, Borland teaches a haul condition generation unit that generates haul traveling data indicating a traveling condition including a haul path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned haul vehicle (see at least Borland [0013]: One or more travel paths 18 may generally extend between load location 14 and dump location 16, and different zones may be established along travel path(s) 18 that can be used to regulate machine travel, [0014]: a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck)…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0017]: processing may include, among other things, determining a current location of each machine 12, a distance between machines 12, speeds of machines 12, projected travel paths of machines 12, and/or locations of machines 12 relative to areas of worksite 10 (e.g., relative to no-overtaking zones 19)),
wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on the haul path (see at least Borland [0014]: a first type of machine (e.g., an excavator) 12a may be stationed at load location 14 and assigned to fill a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck) 12b with material. A third type of machine (e.g., a dozer, a motor grader, a water truck, and/or a service vehicle) 12c may be tasked with traveling up and down travel path(s) 18 to condition travel path(s) 18…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0015]: When a faster machine 12 follows a slower machine 12, the faster machine 12 may suffer productivity and/or efficiency losses. Accordingly, there may be a periodic need for the faster machine 12 to overtake the slower machine 12 when the machines are outside of no-overtaking zones 19, [0016]: each machine 12 (haul truck shown by way of example only) may be equipped with components of an overtaking control system 20 that facilitate control of overtaking events, [0027]: controller 28 may determine if the host machine 12 is currently within a no-overtaking zone 19 or if the projected path of the host machine 12 overlaps with a no-overtaking zone 19 (Step 325), Examiner note: instant specification recites that the water-sprinkling condition may include a path, see at least instant specification [0047]: water-sprinkling condition includes the water-sprinkling path 41 of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Borland with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve productivity and efficiency.
As per claim 8, Gudat does not explicitly disclose wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a water-sprinkling path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle, the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the water-sprinkling path such that at least a part of the haul path and the water-sprinkling path coincide with each other.
However, Borland discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition includes a water-sprinkling path indicating a target traveling route of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle (see at least Borland [0014]: a first type of machine (e.g., an excavator) 12a may be stationed at load location 14 and assigned to fill a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck) 12b with material. A third type of machine (e.g., a dozer, a motor grader, a water truck, and/or a service vehicle) 12c may be tasked with traveling up and down travel path(s) 18 to condition travel path(s) 18…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0015]: When a faster machine 12 follows a slower machine 12, the faster machine 12 may suffer productivity and/or efficiency losses. Accordingly, there may be a periodic need for the faster machine 12 to overtake the slower machine 12 when the machines are outside of no-overtaking zones 19, [0016]: each machine 12 (haul truck shown by way of example only) may be equipped with components of an overtaking control system 20 that facilitate control of overtaking events, [0027]: controller 28 may determine if the host machine 12 is currently within a no-overtaking zone 19 or if the projected path of the host machine 12 overlaps with a no-overtaking zone 19 (Step 325), Examiner note: instant specification recites that the water-sprinkling condition may include a path, see at least instant specification [0047]: water-sprinkling condition includes the water-sprinkling path 41 of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle 3), and
the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the water-sprinkling path such that at least a part of the haul path and the water-sprinkling path coincide with each other (see at least Borland [0014]: a first type of machine (e.g., an excavator) 12a may be stationed at load location 14 and assigned to fill a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck) 12b with material. A third type of machine (e.g., a dozer, a motor grader, a water truck, and/or a service vehicle) 12c may be tasked with traveling up and down travel path(s) 18 to condition travel path(s) 18…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0015]: When a faster machine 12 follows a slower machine 12, the faster machine 12 may suffer productivity and/or efficiency losses. Accordingly, there may be a periodic need for the faster machine 12 to overtake the slower machine 12 when the machines are outside of no-overtaking zones 19, [0016]: each machine 12 (haul truck shown by way of example only) may be equipped with components of an overtaking control system 20 that facilitate control of overtaking events, [0027]: controller 28 may determine if the host machine 12 is currently within a no-overtaking zone 19 or if the projected path of the host machine 12 overlaps with a no-overtaking zone 19 (Step 325), Examiner note: instant specification recites that the water-sprinkling condition may include a path, see at least instant specification [0047]: water-sprinkling condition includes the water-sprinkling path 41 of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Borland with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve productivity and efficiency.
Claim(s) 6-7, 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gudat in view of Borland and JP 2021114055 (Maeda).
As per claim 6, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition as discussed above but does not explicitly disclose an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place, wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle for which the expected time is calculated.
However, Maeda teaches an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place (see at least Maeda page 2: unmanned vehicle 2 is an unmanned dump truck, page 9; Estimated arrival time…indicates the estimated arrival time of each of the plurality of unmanned vehicles i.),
wherein the (see at least Maeda page 11: in order to avoid the interference of the plurality of unmanned vehicles 2…the unmanned vehicle 2B and the unmanned vehicle 2C are stopped or decelerated in front of the intersection area ISA without entering the intersection IS in order to avoid interference with the unmanned vehicle 2A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Maeda with a reasonable expectation of success in order to avoid interference of a plurality of unmanned vehicles.
However, Borland teaches wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle (see at least Borland [0014]: a first type of machine (e.g., an excavator) 12a may be stationed at load location 14 and assigned to fill a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck) 12b with material. A third type of machine (e.g., a dozer, a motor grader, a water truck, and/or a service vehicle) 12c may be tasked with traveling up and down travel path(s) 18 to condition travel path(s) 18…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0015]: When a faster machine 12 follows a slower machine 12, the faster machine 12 may suffer productivity and/or efficiency losses. Accordingly, there may be a periodic need for the faster machine 12 to overtake the slower machine 12 when the machines are outside of no-overtaking zones 19, [0016]: each machine 12 (haul truck shown by way of example only) may be equipped with components of an overtaking control system 20 that facilitate control of overtaking events, [0027]: controller 28 may determine if the host machine 12 is currently within a no-overtaking zone 19 or if the projected path of the host machine 12 overlaps with a no-overtaking zone 19 (Step 325), Examiner note: instant specification recites that the water-sprinkling condition may include a path, see at least instant specification [0047]: water-sprinkling condition includes the water-sprinkling path 41 of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Borland with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve productivity and efficiency.
As per claim 7, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition as discussed above but does not explicitly disclose an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place, wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on a haul path of a past vehicle indicating an unmanned haul vehicle that traveled the work place in the past before the unmanned haul vehicle for which the expected time is calculated.
However, Maeda teaches an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place (see at least Maeda page 2: unmanned vehicle 2 is an unmanned dump truck, page 9; Estimated arrival time…indicates the estimated arrival time of each of the plurality of unmanned vehicles i.),
wherein the (see at least Maeda page 10: Exit expected time…of the loading operation of the unmanned vehicle i is, and the expected arrival time…for standby point WP of the unmanned vehicle i, is calculated on the basis of the loading time required for one of the unmanned vehicle i…The loading time is, for example, known data determined from the specifications of the loading machine 3 or the past actual data of the loading time).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Maeda with a reasonable expectation of success in order to avoid interference of a plurality of unmanned vehicles.
However, Borland teaches wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle (see at least Borland [0014]: a first type of machine (e.g., an excavator) 12a may be stationed at load location 14 and assigned to fill a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck) 12b with material. A third type of machine (e.g., a dozer, a motor grader, a water truck, and/or a service vehicle) 12c may be tasked with traveling up and down travel path(s) 18 to condition travel path(s) 18…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0015]: When a faster machine 12 follows a slower machine 12, the faster machine 12 may suffer productivity and/or efficiency losses. Accordingly, there may be a periodic need for the faster machine 12 to overtake the slower machine 12 when the machines are outside of no-overtaking zones 19, [0016]: each machine 12 (haul truck shown by way of example only) may be equipped with components of an overtaking control system 20 that facilitate control of overtaking events, [0027]: controller 28 may determine if the host machine 12 is currently within a no-overtaking zone 19 or if the projected path of the host machine 12 overlaps with a no-overtaking zone 19 (Step 325), Examiner note: instant specification recites that the water-sprinkling condition may include a path, see at least instant specification [0047]: water-sprinkling condition includes the water-sprinkling path 41 of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Borland with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve productivity and efficiency.
As per claim 10, Gudat discloses generates the first water-sprinkling condition as discussed above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place, wherein the target area designation unit designates the second .
However, Maeda teaches an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place (see at least Maeda page 10: Exit expected time…of the loading operation of the unmanned vehicle i is, and the expected arrival time…for standby point WP of the unmanned vehicle i, is calculated on the basis of the loading time required for one of the unmanned vehicle i…The loading time is, for example, known data determined from the specifications of the loading machine 3 or the past actual data of the loading time),
wherein the target area designation unit designates the second (see at least Maeda page 10: Exit expected time…of the loading operation of the unmanned vehicle i is, and the expected arrival time…for standby point WP of the unmanned vehicle i, is calculated on the basis of the loading time required for one of the unmanned vehicle i…The loading time is, for example, known data determined from the specifications of the loading machine 3 or the past actual data of the loading time, page 11: Time loss calculation unit 48, for each of a plurality of patterns of path sequence in the intersection IS calculated by the passage pattern calculation unit 47 calculates the time loss .sup.i t .sub.loss at each intersection IS of a plurality of unmanned vehicles i).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Maeda with a reasonable expectation of success in order to avoid interference of a plurality of unmanned vehicles.
As per claim 11, Gudat discloses wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area as discussed above, but does not explicitly disclose an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place, wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area to include each of a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle for which the expected time is calculated and a haul path of a future vehicle indicating an unmanned haul vehicle that is to travel the work place in the future than the target vehicle.
However, Maeda teaches an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place (see at least Maeda page 10: Exit expected time…of the loading operation of the unmanned vehicle i is, and the expected arrival time…for standby point WP of the unmanned vehicle i, is calculated on the basis of the loading time required for one of the unmanned vehicle i…The loading time is, for example, known data determined from the specifications of the loading machine 3 or the past actual data of the loading time),
wherein the target area designation unit designates the area to include each of a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle for which the expected time is calculated and a haul path of a future vehicle indicating an unmanned haul vehicle that is to travel the work place in the future than the target vehicle (see at least Maeda page 10: Exit expected time…of the loading operation of the unmanned vehicle i is, and the expected arrival time…for standby point WP of the unmanned vehicle i, is calculated on the basis of the loading time required for one of the unmanned vehicle i…The loading time is, for example, known data determined from the specifications of the loading machine 3 or the past actual data of the loading time, page 11: it is assumed that the pattern of the passing order is not only two patterns of the first pattern and the second pattern but also a plurality of patterns of three or more…Time loss calculation unit 48, for each of a plurality of patterns of path sequence in the intersection IS calculated by the passage pattern calculation unit 47 calculates the time loss .sup.i t .sub.loss at each intersection IS of a plurality of unmanned vehicles I, page 18: the arrival target time .sup.i T .sub.target of the next unmanned vehicle 2 is set to the end predicted time .sup.i T .sub.end The the loading operation for the previous unmanned vehicle 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Maeda with a reasonable expectation of success in order to avoid interference of a plurality of unmanned vehicles.
Claim(s) 6-7, 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gudat in view of Bahnam, and further in view of Borland and JP 2021114055 (Maeda).
As per claim 6, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition as discussed above but does not explicitly disclose an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place, wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle for which the expected time is calculated.
However, Maeda teaches an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place (see at least Maeda page 2: unmanned vehicle 2 is an unmanned dump truck, page 9; Estimated arrival time…indicates the estimated arrival time of each of the plurality of unmanned vehicles i.),
wherein the (see at least Maeda page 11: in order to avoid the interference of the plurality of unmanned vehicles 2…the unmanned vehicle 2B and the unmanned vehicle 2C are stopped or decelerated in front of the intersection area ISA without entering the intersection IS in order to avoid interference with the unmanned vehicle 2A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Maeda with a reasonable expectation of success in order to avoid interference of a plurality of unmanned vehicles.
However, Borland teaches wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle (see at least Borland [0014]: a first type of machine (e.g., an excavator) 12a may be stationed at load location 14 and assigned to fill a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck) 12b with material. A third type of machine (e.g., a dozer, a motor grader, a water truck, and/or a service vehicle) 12c may be tasked with traveling up and down travel path(s) 18 to condition travel path(s) 18…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0015]: When a faster machine 12 follows a slower machine 12, the faster machine 12 may suffer productivity and/or efficiency losses. Accordingly, there may be a periodic need for the faster machine 12 to overtake the slower machine 12 when the machines are outside of no-overtaking zones 19, [0016]: each machine 12 (haul truck shown by way of example only) may be equipped with components of an overtaking control system 20 that facilitate control of overtaking events, [0027]: controller 28 may determine if the host machine 12 is currently within a no-overtaking zone 19 or if the projected path of the host machine 12 overlaps with a no-overtaking zone 19 (Step 325), Examiner note: instant specification recites that the water-sprinkling condition may include a path, see at least instant specification [0047]: water-sprinkling condition includes the water-sprinkling path 41 of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Borland with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve productivity and efficiency.
As per claim 7, Gudat discloses wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition as discussed above but does not explicitly disclose an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place, wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on a haul path of a past vehicle indicating an unmanned haul vehicle that traveled the work place in the past before the unmanned haul vehicle for which the expected time is calculated.
However, Maeda teaches an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place (see at least Maeda page 2: unmanned vehicle 2 is an unmanned dump truck, page 9; Estimated arrival time…indicates the estimated arrival time of each of the plurality of unmanned vehicles i.),
wherein the (see at least Maeda page 10: Exit expected time…of the loading operation of the unmanned vehicle i is, and the expected arrival time…for standby point WP of the unmanned vehicle i, is calculated on the basis of the loading time required for one of the unmanned vehicle i…The loading time is, for example, known data determined from the specifications of the loading machine 3 or the past actual data of the loading time).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Maeda with a reasonable expectation of success in order to avoid interference of a plurality of unmanned vehicles.
However, Borland teaches wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit generates the first water-sprinkling condition based on a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle (see at least Borland [0014]: a first type of machine (e.g., an excavator) 12a may be stationed at load location 14 and assigned to fill a second type of machine (e.g., a haul truck) 12b with material. A third type of machine (e.g., a dozer, a motor grader, a water truck, and/or a service vehicle) 12c may be tasked with traveling up and down travel path(s) 18 to condition travel path(s) 18…Machines 12 may be self-directed machines, [0015]: When a faster machine 12 follows a slower machine 12, the faster machine 12 may suffer productivity and/or efficiency losses. Accordingly, there may be a periodic need for the faster machine 12 to overtake the slower machine 12 when the machines are outside of no-overtaking zones 19, [0016]: each machine 12 (haul truck shown by way of example only) may be equipped with components of an overtaking control system 20 that facilitate control of overtaking events, [0027]: controller 28 may determine if the host machine 12 is currently within a no-overtaking zone 19 or if the projected path of the host machine 12 overlaps with a no-overtaking zone 19 (Step 325), Examiner note: instant specification recites that the water-sprinkling condition may include a path, see at least instant specification [0047]: water-sprinkling condition includes the water-sprinkling path 41 of the unmanned water-sprinkling vehicle 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Borland with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve productivity and efficiency.
As per claim 10, Gudat discloses generates the first water-sprinkling condition as discussed above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the water-sprinkling condition generation unit an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place, wherein the target area designation unit designates the second .
However, Maeda teaches an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place (see at least Maeda page 10: Exit expected time…of the loading operation of the unmanned vehicle i is, and the expected arrival time…for standby point WP of the unmanned vehicle i, is calculated on the basis of the loading time required for one of the unmanned vehicle i…The loading time is, for example, known data determined from the specifications of the loading machine 3 or the past actual data of the loading time),
wherein the target area designation unit designates the second (see at least Maeda page 10: Exit expected time…of the loading operation of the unmanned vehicle i is, and the expected arrival time…for standby point WP of the unmanned vehicle i, is calculated on the basis of the loading time required for one of the unmanned vehicle i…The loading time is, for example, known data determined from the specifications of the loading machine 3 or the past actual data of the loading time, page 11: Time loss calculation unit 48, for each of a plurality of patterns of path sequence in the intersection IS calculated by the passage pattern calculation unit 47 calculates the time loss .sup.i t .sub.loss at each intersection IS of a plurality of unmanned vehicles i).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Maeda with a reasonable expectation of success in order to avoid interference of a plurality of unmanned vehicles.
As per claim 11, Gudat discloses wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area as discussed above, but does not explicitly disclose an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place, wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area to include each of a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle for which the expected time is calculated and a haul path of a future vehicle indicating an unmanned haul vehicle that is to travel the work place in the future than the target vehicle.
However, Maeda teaches an expected time calculation unit that calculates an expected time at which an unmanned haul vehicle arrives at a work place (see at least Maeda page 10: Exit expected time…of the loading operation of the unmanned vehicle i is, and the expected arrival time…for standby point WP of the unmanned vehicle i, is calculated on the basis of the loading time required for one of the unmanned vehicle i…The loading time is, for example, known data determined from the specifications of the loading machine 3 or the past actual data of the loading time),
wherein the target area designation unit designates the area to include each of a haul path of a target vehicle indicating the unmanned haul vehicle for which the expected time is calculated and a haul path of a future vehicle indicating an unmanned haul vehicle that is to travel the work place in the future than the target vehicle (see at least Maeda page 10: Exit expected time…of the loading operation of the unmanned vehicle i is, and the expected arrival time…for standby point WP of the unmanned vehicle i, is calculated on the basis of the loading time required for one of the unmanned vehicle i…The loading time is, for example, known data determined from the specifications of the loading machine 3 or the past actual data of the loading time, page 11: it is assumed that the pattern of the passing order is not only two patterns of the first pattern and the second pattern but also a plurality of patterns of three or more…Time loss calculation unit 48, for each of a plurality of patterns of path sequence in the intersection IS calculated by the passage pattern calculation unit 47 calculates the time loss .sup.i t .sub.loss at each intersection IS of a plurality of unmanned vehicles I, page 18: the arrival target time .sup.i T .sub.target of the next unmanned vehicle 2 is set to the end predicted time .sup.i T .sub.end The the loading operation for the previous unmanned vehicle 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Maeda with a reasonable expectation of success in order to avoid interference of a plurality of unmanned vehicles.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gudat in view of US 20150233245 (Sheehan).
As per claim 12, Should it be found that Gudat does not explicitly disclose wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area based on an outer shape of the work place,
However, Sheehan teaches wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area based on an outer shape of the work place (see at least Sheehan [0002]: worksite may be divided into zones requiring watering, such that that the operator drives the watering truck to distribute water to a certain subset of the zones, [0013]: watering truck 100 is configured to spray water at a worksite 300, [0021]: watering controller 204 defines boundary conditions for the zone 302 on the worksite 300… boundary 304 is representative of a virtual demarcation of the zone 302 on the worksite 300. The boundary 304 may include any regular or irregular geometrical shape., [0022]: path of traversal "POT" associated with the watering truck 100 includes multiple passes on the worksite 300, [0023]: watering controller 204 selectively triggers the respective spray heads 108-1, 108-2, 108-3, 108-4 that lie within the boundary 304 of the zone 302. In one embodiment, when the watering controller 204 detects that the watering truck 100 is within the boundary 304 of the zone 302, Fig. 3, Examiner note: the instant specification [0052] recites As illustrated in FIG. 11, the target area designation unit 147 may designate the second water-sprinkling area 52 in the work place 4 based on the outer shape of the work place 4. The outer shape data indicating the outer shape of the work place 4 is acquired by the work place data acquisition unit 143.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Sheehan with a reasonable expectation of success in order to automatic watering of specific portions of the worksite.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gudat in view of Banham, and further in view of Sheehan.
As per claim 12, Should it be found that Gudat does not explicitly disclose wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area based on an outer shape of the work place,
However, Sheehan teaches wherein the target area designation unit designates the second water-sprinkling area based on an outer shape of the work place (see at least Sheehan [0002]: worksite may be divided into zones requiring watering, such that that the operator drives the watering truck to distribute water to a certain subset of the zones, [0013]: watering truck 100 is configured to spray water at a worksite 300, [0021]: watering controller 204 defines boundary conditions for the zone 302 on the worksite 300… boundary 304 is representative of a virtual demarcation of the zone 302 on the worksite 300. The boundary 304 may include any regular or irregular geometrical shape., [0022]: path of traversal "POT" associated with the watering truck 100 includes multiple passes on the worksite 300, [0023]: watering controller 204 selectively triggers the respective spray heads 108-1, 108-2, 108-3, 108-4 that lie within the boundary 304 of the zone 302. In one embodiment, when the watering controller 204 detects that the watering truck 100 is within the boundary 304 of the zone 302, Fig. 3, Examiner note: the instant specification [0052] recites As illustrated in FIG. 11, the target area designation unit 147 may designate the second water-sprinkling area 52 in the work place 4 based on the outer shape of the work place 4. The outer shape data indicating the outer shape of the work place 4 is acquired by the work place data acquisition unit 143.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention as disclosed by Gudat by incorporating the teachings of Sheehan with a reasonable expectation of success in order to automatic watering of specific portions of the worksite.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20220308589 (Ishii) (see at least [0032]: in the mine site, in addition to the unmanned dump truck 10, which conveys the loads, such as earth and sand and ores, the manned vehicle 20 travels. The manned vehicle 20 is a vehicle configured such that the driver and other occupants can get on and the driver can perform the driving operation. For example, the manned vehicle 20 can include a shovel with which excavation and a loading work are performed at the loading site 200, a bulldozer that bulldozes a road surface of the track 100, a sprinkler truck, and a service car that patrols in the mine site, [0068]: control that causes the unmanned dump truck 10 to bypass to a bypass route can be performed).
US 20230166632 (Braunstein) (see at least abstract: system can assign a machine to dispense material at designated areas along a route at a worksite. For example, the machine can be an electric water truck on a mine site, and the electric water truck can be assigned to spray water at areas along a route to control dust on the mine site, [0026]: operations performed by excavators, haul trucks, and/or other machines and equipment at a mine site can generate dust that impairs visibility, reduces air quality, and/or otherwise impacts work at the worksite 100. Accordingly, the machine 102 can be a water truck assigned to travel the route 108 through the mine site to control dust by spraying water, and/or a fluid containing dust-suppressing chemicals, at one or more designated material dispense areas 124 along the route 108).
US 20110160920 (Orr) (see at least [0085]: worksite 100 may be divided up into an x-y grid having cells of a predetermined size (e.g., 25 square meters), and each row of worksite surface location column 706 may correspond to a different cell of worksite 100, [0093], Fig. 7).
US 20210148086 (Ready-Campbell) (see at least [0256]: When the moisture content reaches a threshold measurement, the earth compaction engine 1140 instructs the water-carrying vehicle to halt the dispensing of water and instructs a compaction vehicle to execute the compaction routine. In some embodiments, the standby compaction vehicle that measures the moisture content is also configured to dispense water. In such implementations, the earth compaction engine may communicate the request directly to the standby vehicle, rather than the supplementary vehicle communicator 1150).
US 20110160919 (Orr) (see at least [0085] Worksite surface location 706 may comprise a column of worksite metadata table 704, with each row thereof corresponding to a different location on the worksite surface. For example, worksite 100 may be divided up into an x-y grid having cells of a predetermined size (e.g., 25 square meters), and each row of worksite surface location column 706 may correspond to a different cell of worksite 100).
US 20230194280 (Braunstein) (see at least [0018]: The worksite 100 can have a plurality of paths (e.g., roads) 104 to and from various portions of the worksite 100, such as to and from the loading area 107 and to and from the dumping area 108 (not all paths 104 labeled in FIG. 1), [0019]: paths 104 can be divided into segments 105 based on the positions of intersections, start or finish of certain path conditions (e.g., certain grades), or specific zones or areas of the worksite 100 (e.g., the loading area 107 and the dumping area 108), [0043]: A map 125 of the worksite 100 can be created and can include various portions of the worksite 100, including the different paths 104 and the different areas, such as the loading area 107 and the dumping area 108, [0078]: based on the moisture content as monitored by various sensors positioned along the route segment 105, or on machines 200 running the route segment 105, or based on models that track moisture content, machines 200 can be identified to have better performance at certain moisture content, then a recommendation can be made for watering that route segment 105 (or allowing it to dry)).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELINA M SHUDY whose telephone number is (571)272-6757. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 10am - 6pm.
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, Fadey Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
Angelina Shudy
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3668
/Angelina M Shudy/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
