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 .
This is in response to Applicant’s communication filed on 5/27/26, wherein:
Claims 1-17 are currently pending;
Claims 1-5, 9-13 have been emended;
Claims 14-18 have been added.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YAMAMOTO (US 2020/0130194) from Applicant’s IDS filed on 11/20/24 in view KAWABE ET AL (US 2024/0288939). Herein after YAMAMOTO and KAWABE.
As for claim 1, YAMAMOTO discloses an avatar configured to perform an action via remote control {see at least figure 1, mobile robot 100 and remote operator 300, pars. 0026, 0028} which includes a communication avatar including a physical body schema and circuitry to communicate with a recipient (service user) through control of the body schema via the remote control, at least part of the body schema being driven {see at least figure 2, mobile robot 100 includes head part122, microphone 132, display 141; figure 3, acquisition 130, communication unit 190 and at least pars. 0031, 0033-0036, 0043, 0047, which discloses a head part 122; microphone 132, display panel 141; figure 5 discloses the communication avatar communicate with a recipient (service user)}; and
a remote machine avatar including a manipulator, the remote machine avatar including a circuitry configured to cause the manipulator to perform a task through control of the manipulator via the remote control {see at least figure 2, pars. 0025, 0029-0032 discloses a cart part 110, the arm 123; figure 3, pars. 0028, 0038-0040 discloses a cart driving unit 145 and upper body driving unit 146; The arm 123 and the hand 124 are driven via a motor (not shown), grip various objects in a controlled posture}.
YAMAMOTO discloses a single robot/avatar with communication avatar and the remote communication avatar as indicated above. However, YAMAMOTO does not explicitly disclose that the communication avatar is different avatar than the remote machine avatar.
However, KAWABE discloses the known feature of having a communication avatar to be separate or different with remote machine avatar as shown in at least abstract, figures 1, 4, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, pars. 0007, 0041-0044. which show communication avatar 111, and remote machine avatar including a manipulator 120. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective of filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of KAWABE of have two separate avatars into the system of YAMAMOTO as a desire choice of making two parts separate from a single robot/avatar. Further splitting avatar system into two parts would be more efficiency since communication avatar is designed for eye contract, dialog, expression, while machine avatar with manipulator is for physical labor/task performance.
As for claim 2, which discloses wherein the communication avatar includes a verbal communicator configured to make verbal communication, and an action representation unit capable of being driven in imitation of at least part of a human or animal body {see YAMAMOTO at least figures 1, 5, 2 items 100, 132, 042 and at least pars. 0024, 0035}.
As for claim 3, YAMAMOTO/KAWABE discloses claimed invention as indicated above. YAMAMOTO/KAWABE further discloses wherein the communication avatar includes a first monitor to display a first moving image showing an operator who performs the remote control {see YAMAMOTO at least figure 1 and 5, pars. 0033, 0035, 0041}, and a first camera provided in a rear of the first monitor and configured to shoot in a direction toward a projection surface of the first monitor, from the rear {see at least figure 2, camera 131, par. 0033}, and the first moving image is a moving image obtained by shooting in a direction toward a projection surface of a second monitor by a second camera {see at least figures 1, 2, pars. 0033,0035-0036, 0041}, the second monitor being enabled to present, to the operator, a second moving image captured by the first camera, the second camera being provided in a rear of the second monitor {see at least figure 1, pars. 0028, 0033}.
As for claim 4, YAMAMOTO/KAWABE discloses a status indicator to indicate which one of the communication avatar and the remote machine avatar performs an action {see YAMAMOTO at least figure 6, pars. 0085-0086}.
As for claim 6, YAMAMOTO/KAWABE would be inherently include the avatar is foldable such as stick arm 123 as shown in figure 2 to be housed in a container, and becomes operable by expansion.
As for claim 7, YAMAMOTO/KAWABE discloses wherein at least one of color or clothing of the communication avatar is changeable by changing a moving image to be displayed on the communication avatar {see YAMAMOTO at least figure 4, at least pars. 0032, 0060, 0063}.
As for claim 8, YAMAMOTO/KAWABE disclose wherein at least one of words said by the avatar, a travel direction of the avatar, or a document provided by the avatar is projected onto an area near the avatar {see YAMAMOTO at least figure 5 which discloses at least words said by the avatar}.
As for claim 9, YAMAMOTO/KAWABE discloses an operation allocator to allocate an operation of an operator who performs the remote control to a command value directed to either the communication avatar or the remote machine avatar {see YAMAMOTO at least figures 1, 5 and pars. 0006-0007}.
As for claim 10, YAMAMOTO/KAWABE discloses comprising a drive mechanism capable of changing a relative position of the communication avatar to the remote machine avatar {see YAMAMOTO at least figure 1, item 110, figure 2, item 145 and pars. 0029, 0038-0039}.
As for claim 11, YAMAMOTO discloses a remote machine operation system comprising: an operation interface to receive an operation of an operator {see at least figure 1, pars. 0025, 0028 discloses remote operator operates the remote terminal 300}; and an avatar device including circuitry that is configured to perform an action according to the operation received by the operation interface, at a location different from a location where the operator is present {see at least figures 1, 5 and pars. 0025-0026}, wherein the avatar includes a communication avatar having a physical body schema to communicate with a recipient through control of the body schema via remote control, at least part of the body schema being driven {see at least figure 2, mobile robot 100 includes head part122, microphone 132, display 141; figure 3, acquisition 130, communication unit 190 and at least pars. 0031, 0033-0036, 0043, 0047, which discloses a head part 122; microphone 132, display panel 141; figure 5 discloses the communication avatar communicate with a recipient (service user)}; and a remote machine avatar including manipulator, the remote machine avatar including circuitry configured to cause the manipulator to perform task through control of the manipulator via remote control {see at least figure 2, pars. 0025, 0029-0032 discloses a cart part 110, the arm 123; figure 3, pars. 0028, 0038-0040 discloses a cart driving unit 145 and upper body driving unit 146; The arm 123 and the hand 124 are driven via a motor (not shown), grip various objects in a controlled posture}.
YAMAMOTO discloses a single robot/avatar with communication avatar and the remote communication avatar as indicated above. However, YAMAMOTO does not explicitly disclose that the communication avatar is different avatar than the remote machine avatar.
However, KAWABE discloses the known feature of having a communication avatar to be separate or different with remote machine avatar as shown in at least abstract, figures 1, 4, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, pars. 0007, 0041-0044. which show communication avatar 111, and remote machine avatar including a manipulator 120. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective of filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of KAWABE of have two separate avatars into the system of YAMAMOTO as a desire choice of making two parts separate from a single robot/avatar. Further splitting avatar system into two parts would be more efficiency since communication avatar is designed for eye contract, dialog, expression, while machine avatar with manipulator is for physical labor/task performance.
As for claim 12, YAMAMOTO/KAWABE discloses a display device configured to present, to the operator {see at least figure 1, 5}, a moving image in which a destination is superimposed on a moving image showing an area around the avatar {see at least figures 1, 5}, the destination being a location where the remote machine avatar is to reach, wherein the operation interface receives, from the operator, an operation to move a position of the destination, the display device moves the destination displayed on the display device according to the operation received by the operation interface, and when the operation interface receives an operation to fix the destination from the operator, the remote machine avatar starts to move to the destination {see YAMAMOTO at least figures 1, 5 and pars. 0025-0027, 0075-0078}.
As for claim 13, YAMAMOTO/ KAWABE disclose, wherein the communication avatar includes an indicator configured to point to an external position that has been specified, the operation interface receives an operation to move a destination of the remote machine avatar, the indication device points to the destination received by the operation interface, and when the operation interface receives an operation to fix the destination from the operator, the remote machine avatar starts to move to the destination {see YAMAMOTO at least figures 1, 2 and 5, pars. 0029, 0039-0040, 0054, 0060}.
As for claim 14, YAMAMOTO/ KAWABE disclose wherein the physical body schema includes arms and legs {see KAWABE at least figures 1, 4, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, pars. 0007, 0041-0044; YAMAMOTO at least figure 1}.
As for claim 15, YAMAMOTO/ KAWABE disclose wherein the communication avatar communicate with the recipient while the remote machine avatar perform a task {see KAWABE at least figures 1, 4, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, pars. 0007, 0041-0044}.
As for claim 16, YAMAMOTO/ KAWABE discloses, wherein the manipulator of the remote machine avatar is controlled via hand movements of the recipient which are received by the remote control {see KAWABE at least figures 1, 4, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, pars. 0007, 0041-0044}.
As for claim 17, YAMAMOTO/ KAWABE discloses, wherein the communication avatar is standardized for multiple usage, and the remote machine avatar is a machine selected according to a task to be performed by the avatar among a plurality of kinds of machines that are capable of being remotely controlled and are individual designed according to a task to be performed {see KAWABE at least figures 1, 4, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, pars. 0007, 0041-0044}.
As for claim 18, YAMAMOTO/ KAWABE discloses wherein a hand motion of an operator who perform the remote control is reflected in a motion of the manipulator, and an expression of the operator is reflected in an arm motion of the communication avatar {see KAWABE at least figures 1, 4, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, pars. 0007, 0041-0044}.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YAMAMOTO as applied to claims above and in view of TERADA ET AL (JP-2002-264070) from Applicant’s IDS file don 6/4/25. Herein after TERADA
As for claim 5, YAMAMOTO/KAWABE discloses claimed invention as indicated above. YAMAMOTO/KAWABE further discloses a laser scanner 133 to detecting whether an obstacle exists in each direction and passes a detection signal, which indicate the result of the detection to the controller 150 {see YAMAMOTO at least pars. 0030, 0043}. YAMAMTO/KAWABE does not explicitly discloses a current breaking device to interrupt a current of a drive system in the remote machine avatar when an obstruction is detected at a distance from the avatar, the distance being less than or equal to a threshold. However, such limitation is taught in at least in figures 1-3, claims 1-4 of TERADA reference. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective of filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of TERADA into the system of YAMAMOTO/KAWABE with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide the system with the enhanced capacity of executing a safety of the avatar when there is an object too close to the avatar.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot in view of new ground rejection based on Applicant’s amended language.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kira Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-1614. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 9:00-5:00 ET.
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, Khoi Tran can be reached on 571-272-6919. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KIRA NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights