Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
The Office Action is in response to the application filed 11/27/2024. Claims 1-14 and 17-22 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/27/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 18 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stortstrom et al. US 20190087925 A1 (“Stortstrom”).
Regarding Claim 18. Stortstrom teaches a controller for monitoring pedestrians in a warehouse, wherein the controller is configured to:
receive first-RFID-signalling from a first RFID antenna associated with a pedestrian access point in a warehouse (An illustrated PPE checker 10 may also include a Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) reader 80 that reads an RFID tag (not shown) that may be integrated with a personal badge of the individual 50. Alternately, the RFID tag may be paired with individual protective equipment elements. For example, RFID tags may be integrated with protective equipment such as safety hard hats, safety boots, utility belts, and safety goggles [paragraph 15]);
identify that a pedestrian is passing, has passed, or is about to pass, through the pedestrian access point (At 310 of FIG. 3, the presence of an individual is detected at a restricted area, such as a security checkpoint [paragraph 27]), and in response:
process the first-RFID-signalling to identify any RFID-tag-signals from one or more respective RFID tags that: are associated with the pedestrian identified as passing through the pedestrian access point; and include a PPE-identifier that is associated with an item of PPE that can be worn by the pedestrian (upon detection of the individual by the proximity sensor 60 (FIG. 1), an RFID reader 80 (FIG. 1A) may be activated, and the RFID tags 90 (FIG. 1B) may be detected, and the detected signals may be transmitted to the server 210 (FIG. 2) and compared to a list of protective equipment required for entry to the restricted area [paragraph 28]);
determine whether or not any identified RFID-tag-signals represent a complete set of PPE items for the pedestrian (At processing block 325, a determination may be made as to whether the protective equipment detected by the 3D camera 70 (FIG. 1A) or the RFID reader 80 (FIG. 1A) meet the protective equipment requirements for the specific location. If, as indicated in block 350, the detected PPEs do not meet the protective equipment requirements, in processing block 355 a message may be displayed informing the individual that access to the location has been denied); and
generate an alert-output-signal if an incomplete set of PPE items is determined (If one or more of the necessary protective equipment is not detected, a message may be displayed on a display 20 in order to alert the individual 50 that access to the restricted area 40 has failed [paragraph 12]).
Regarding Claim 20. Stortstrom teaches the controller of claim 18.
Stortstrom also teaches:
further configured to:
compare the items of PPE that are associated with the identified RFID-tag-signals with a list of items of PPE that are required (Upon receiving a signal from the proximity sensor 60, the illustrated 3D camera 70 scans the individual 50 and equipment being worn by the individual 50, and compares the equipment detected on the individual 50 with a list of protective equipment that may be required to be worn in the restricted area 40 [paragraph 11]).
Regarding Claim 21. Stortstrom teaches the controller of claim 18.
Stortstrom also teaches:
further configured to:
wherein the alert-output-signal includes details of the item or items of PPE that have not been detected (The display 20 may also present a message that lists the protective equipment that are required to be worn in the restricted area 40 [paragraph 12]).
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) 1-7, 11-14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hewett US 20190331785 A1 (“Hewett”) in combination with Stubbs et al. US 20160271800 A1 (“Stubbs”).
Regarding Claim 1. Hewett teaches a controller for monitoring pedestrians in a warehouse, wherein the controller is configured to:
receive first-RFID-signalling from a first RFID antenna;
receive second-RFID-signalling from a second RFID antenna, wherein a field of view of the first RFID antenna is spaced apart from a field of view of the second RFID antenna in a first dimension (a method for mapping a response pattern for a predefined area compensating for environmental and structural interference, comprising traversing the predefined area with a robot with an attached radio-frequency tag; transmitting a plurality of calibration signals at respective power levels and phases via a plurality of antennas disposed in the predefined area; and comparing a predetermined location of the robot with a triangulated position of the attached radio-frequency identification tag [paragraph 40]. In some embodiments, said mapping includes traversing the predefined area with a robot with an attached radio-frequency tag; transmitting a plurality of calibration signals via the plurality of antennas at respective power levels and phases; and comparing a predetermined location of the robot with a triangulated position of the attached radio-frequency identification tag [paragraph 51], wherein the method is intended to be usable in a warehouse [paragraph 3]. As for the majority of the claim language, the claims are describing triangulation);
identify an RFID-tag-signal from an RFID tag that is associated with a pedestrian in the first-RFID-signalling (In some embodiments, the method further comprises disposing a calibration radio-frequency identification tag on a person and determining a location of the person as the person traverses the predetermined location [paragraph 42]. In some embodiments, the method further comprises converting the second response signal from the radio-frequency identification tag from an analog signal into a digital signal in order to identify a radio-frequency identification tag number [paragraph 27]);
identify an RFID-tag-signal from the RFID tag that is associated with the pedestrian in the second-RFID-signalling (paragraphs 27 and 42); and
determine a location of the pedestrian with reference to the RFID antennas based on the RFID-tag- signals in both the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling (In accordance with an aspect disclosed herein, there is set forth a computer implemented method suitable for implementation on a processor comprising analyzing first and second response signals via a plurality of antennas from the radio-frequency identification tag; and triangulating a position of the radio-frequency identification tag based upon said analyzing, wherein said analyzing and triangulating are performed by a processor [paragraph 44]. In the case of time difference of arrival (TDOA – a known method for tag location), a signal is sent to an RFID tag from one of three antennas. The tag receives the signal and transmits a signal in response. The response signal is then received at all three of the antennas at different times. The time between original signal transmission and reception of the response signal at each antenna can be used to determine the distance from the tag to each antenna, which can then be used to locate the RFID tag (relative to the antennas) using trilateration [paragraph 71]).
Hewett does not teach:
The first and second RFID antennas are mounted on a vehicle.
However, Stubbs teaches:
The first and second RFID antennas are mounted on a vehicle (FIG. 4 shows a person with a number of RFID tags on a worker at 102, and a robot at 120 which has RFID tags on the robot at 305. The warehouse worker, warehouse robot, or both can also include one or more RFID readers to identify nearby tags, verify tags, and establish virtual work zones as necessary [paragraph 17]. FIG. 4 of Stubbs also shows a setup in which a robot features at least 2 RFID antennas, and describes a process in FIG. 9 in which the robot determines and maintains its distance from the human worker, taking evasive action at 930).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Hewett with the first and second RFID antennas are mounted on a vehicle as taught by Stubbs so as to allow a robot or other type of vehicle on a warehouse floor to avoid colliding with human workers, as taught by Stubbs.
Regarding Claim 2. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 1.
Hewett also teaches:
further configured to:
provide an output-signal based on the determined location of the pedestrian (In some embodiments, the method further comprises disposing a calibration radio-frequency identification tag on a person; determining a location of the person as the person traverses the predetermined area; comparing the location of the person to a predicted constructive interference zone; comparing constructive interference data to predicted interference data; and adjusting at least one of signal power or phase of the secondary activation signal until the constructive interference data matches the predicted interference data [paragraph 42]).
Regarding Claim 3. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 1.
Hewett also teaches:
further configured to:
compare a signal strength of the RFID-tag-signal in the first-RFID-signaling with a signal strength of the RFID-tag-signal in the second-RFID-signaling in order to determine the location of the pedestrian with respect to the vehicle in the first dimension (FIG. 2 shows how the prior art uses Radio Signal Strength Indication (RSSI) to measure the distance of the tag between antennas based on the signal strength of the RFID-tag-signal [paragraph 73]).
Regarding Claim 4. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 1.
Hewett also teaches:
further configured to:
identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from the RFID tag in the first-RFID-signalling over a period of time;
identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from the RFID tag in the second-RFID-signalling over the period of time (The system 100 functions to locate RFID tags within a three-dimensional volume of interest (or a two-dimensional plane of interest). The system 100 preferably determines tag location across time in order to track changes in tag location and/or tag movement [paragraph 69]. Additionally, FIG. 7 shows some of the steps of the triangulation process, wherein step S210 may need to be iterated multiple times at different transmission settings before receiving a response signal from a particular RFID tag [paragraph 121]. Steps S230 and S240 can also be iterated multiple times [paragraph 129]);
determine a movement of the pedestrian with reference to the antennas based on the plurality of RFID-tag-signals in both the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling (The system 100 preferably determines tag location across time in order to track changes in tag location and/or tag movement [paragraph 69]); and
provide an output-signal based on the determined movement of the pedestrian (Additionally or alternatively, Steps S230 and Steps S240 are iterated along with an intermediate iteration of Step S250; for example, after each iteration of Step S230 and Step S240, Step S250 uses the results to further confine tag location and to direct parameters of the next iteration of Step S230, the iteration cycle continuing until Step S250 has suitably determined tag location (e.g., by reducing possible tag location area to an area below some threshold area) [paragraph 129]. Step S250 includes calculating the RFID tag position. Step S250 functions to determine or estimate where RFID tags are located based on responses to particular interference patterns. Step S250 is preferably iterated along with steps S230 and S240 [paragraph 130], providing details as the target with the RFID tag moves).
Hewett does not teach:
The antennas are mounted on a vehicle.
However, Stubbs teaches:
The antennas are mounted on a vehicle (FIG. 4 shows a person with a number of RFID tags on a worker at 102, and a robot at 120 which has RFID tags on the robot at 305. The warehouse worker, warehouse robot, or both can also include one or more RFID readers to identify nearby tags, verify tags, and establish virtual work zones as necessary [paragraph 17]. FIG. 4 of Stubbs also shows a setup in which a robot features at least 2 RFID antennas, and describes a process in FIG. 9 in which the robot determines and maintains its distance from the human worker, taking evasive action at 930).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Hewett with the antennas are mounted on a vehicle as taught by Stubbs so as to allow a robot or other type of vehicle on a warehouse floor to avoid colliding with human workers, as taught by Stubbs.
Regarding Claim 5. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 4.
Hewett also teaches:
further configured to:
provide an output-signal based on:
the determined movement of the pedestrian; and the determined location of the pedestrian (Additionally or alternatively, Steps S230 and Steps S240 are iterated along with an intermediate iteration of Step S250; for example, after each iteration of Step S230 and Step S240, Step S250 uses the results to further confine tag location and to direct parameters of the next iteration of Step S230, the iteration cycle continuing until Step S250 has suitably determined tag location (e.g., by reducing possible tag location area to an area below some threshold area) [paragraph 129]. Step S250 includes calculating the RFID tag position. Step S250 functions to determine or estimate where RFID tags are located based on responses to particular interference patterns. Step S250 is preferably iterated along with steps S230 and S240 [paragraph 130], providing details as the target with the RFID tag moves).
Regarding Claim 6. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 1.
Hewett does not teach:
further configured to:
identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from a respective plurality of RFID tags that are associated with a pedestrian in the first-RFID-signalling;
identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from the respective plurality of RFID tags that are associated with the pedestrian in the second-RFID-signalling; and
determine the location of the pedestrian with reference to the vehicle based on the plurality of RFID-tag-signals in both the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling.
However, Stubbs teaches:
further configured to:
identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from a respective plurality of RFID tags that are associated with a pedestrian in the first-RFID-signalling;
identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from the respective plurality of RFID tags that are associated with the pedestrian in the second-RFID-signalling (Multiple RFID tags can be worn by a person, as shown in FIG. 5A. At 135, the robot 120 can detect the presence of a worker 102 due to RFID interaction between the robot 120 and the worker 102. In other words, depending on the configuration, if the robot 120 senses, by an RFID reader, one or more RFID tags associated with a worker 102, this indicates that the robot 120 is within the worker's work zone 105 and/or that the worker 102 is in the robot's work zone 105 [paragraph 24]); and
determine the location of the pedestrian with reference to the vehicle based on the plurality of RFID-tag-signals in both the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling (FIG. 4 shows a person with a number of RFID tags on a worker at 102, and a robot at 120 which has RFID tags on the robot at 305. The warehouse worker, warehouse robot, or both can also include one or more RFID readers to identify nearby tags, verify tags, and establish virtual work zones as necessary [paragraph 17]. FIG. 4 of Stubbs also shows a setup in which a robot features at least 2 RFID antennas, and describes a process in FIG. 9 in which the robot determines and maintains its distance from the human worker, taking evasive action at 930).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Hewett with further configured to: identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from a respective plurality of RFID tags that are associated with a pedestrian in the first-RFID-signalling; identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from the respective plurality of RFID tags that are associated with the pedestrian in the second-RFID-signalling; and determine the location of the pedestrian with reference to the vehicle based on the plurality of RFID-tag-signals in both the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling as taught by Stubbs so as to allow the system to detect multiple tags in case one or more of the tags should fail or not be able to transmit the signal from a particular angle, which Stubbs discloses as a potential problem in paragraph 54.
Regarding Claim 7. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 6.
Hewett also teaches:
further configured to:
determine the location of the pedestrian with reference to the vehicle based on the plurality of RFID-tag-signals in both the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling only if at least a threshold number of RFID-tag-signals from respective RFID tags are identified in both the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling (Hewett teaches that in some embodiments, the method includes determining a location of a person with an RFID tag and triangulating a position of the RFID tag, wherein triangulation always requires a minimum of three antennas [paragraphs 40-42]).
Regarding Claim 11. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 1.
Hewett also teaches:
further configured to:
identify the RFID-tag-signal in each of the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling only if the RFID-tag-signal has a signal strength that is greater than a threshold value (FIG. 2 shows how the prior art uses Radio Signal Strength Indication (RSSI) to measure the distance of the tag between antennas based on the signal strength of the RFID-tag-signal [paragraph 73]. Examples of the constructive interference patterns produced during STSRM are as shown in FIGS. 3A and 3B. FIGS. 3A and 3B include field contour plots, where field strength above a threshold is displayed as black and field strength below the threshold is displayed as white [paragraph 77], wherein signals below the threshold strength are not used in determining the location of the RFID tags).
Regarding Claim 12. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 1.
Hewett also teaches:
further configured to:
identify the RFID-tag-signal in each of the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID- signalling only if the RFID-signalling includes at least a threshold number of RFID-tag-signals from the RFID tag over a predetermined period of time (FIG. 2 shows how the prior art uses Radio Signal Strength Indication (RSSI) to measure the distance of the tag between antennas based on the signal strength of the RFID-tag-signal [paragraph 73]. Examples of the constructive interference patterns produced during STSRM are as shown in FIGS. 3A and 3B. FIGS. 3A and 3B include field contour plots, where field strength above a threshold is displayed as black and field strength below the threshold is displayed as white [paragraph 77], wherein signals below the threshold strength are not used in determining the location of the RFID tags. Multiple signals are shown in FIGS. 3A and 3B, and described in paragraph 77).
Regarding Claim 13. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 1.
Hewett does not teach:
further configured to:
receive a vehicle-speed-signal that represents the speed of the vehicle;
provide an output-signal based on:
the determined location of the pedestrian; and the vehicle-speed-signal.
However, Stubbs teaches:
further configured to:
receive a vehicle-speed-signal that represents the speed of the vehicle;
provide an output-signal based on:
the determined location of the pedestrian; and the vehicle-speed-signal (The robot 120 can communicate with the central control 115 using the transceiver 610 and can provide, for example, location, direction, and speed information [paragraph 66]. FIG. 9 shows how the robot information is used, along with the location information of the worker received through the RFID tags, are used in determining both the location of the worker and the robot in a work zone and outputting a command, if necessary, for the robot to take evasive action at 925 [paragraph 85]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Hewett with further configured to: receive a vehicle-speed-signal that represents the speed of the vehicle; provide an output-signal based on: the determined location of the pedestrian; and the vehicle-speed-signal as taught by Stubbs so that the system can account for the speed of the moving vehicle relative to the RFID tags of the person.
Regarding Claim 14. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 1.
Hewett does not teach:
further configured to:
receive third-RFID-signalling from a third RFID antenna mounted on the vehicle, wherein a field of view of the third RFID antenna is offset from the field of view of at least one of the first RFID antenna and the second RFID antenna in a second dimension that is transverse to the first dimension;
receive fourth-RFID-signalling from a fourth RFID antenna mounted on the vehicle, wherein a field of view of the fourth RFID antenna is offset from the field of view of at least one of the first RFID antenna and the second RFID antenna in the second dimension (FIG. 2 shows a third RFID antenna receiving signals from a tag with a different field of view than the first and second antennas. FIGS. 3A and 3B show four antennas positioned at four corners to receive signals along. It should also be noted that adding a third and fourth RFID antenna is mere repetition of parts);
identify an RFID-tag-signal from the RFID tag that is associated with the pedestrian in the third-RFID-signalling (In some embodiments, the method further comprises disposing a calibration radio-frequency identification tag on a person and determining a location of the person as the person traverses the predetermined location [paragraph 42]. In some embodiments, the method further comprises converting the second response signal from the radio-frequency identification tag from an analog signal into a digital signal in order to identify a radio-frequency identification tag number [paragraph 27]. FIGS. 3A-4B shows how the four antennas can be used to measure signal strength for determining the location of the person [paragraphs 77]);
identify an RFID-tag-signal from the RFID tag that is associated with the pedestrian in the fourth-RFID-signalling (paragraphs 27, 42, and 77); and
determine a location of the pedestrian with reference to the vehicle based on the RFID-tag- signals in each of the first-RFID-signalling, the second-RFID-signalling, third-RFID-signalling and the fourth-RFID-signalling (paragraph 71).
Regarding Claim 17. Hewett teaches a method of monitoring pedestrians in a warehouse, wherein the method comprises:
receiving first-RFID-signalling from a first RFID antenna;
receiving second-RFID-signalling from a second RFID antenna, wherein a field of view of the first RFID antenna is spaced apart from a field of view of the second RFID antenna in a first dimension (a method for mapping a response pattern for a predefined area compensating for environmental and structural interference, comprising traversing the predefined area with a robot with an attached radio-frequency tag; transmitting a plurality of calibration signals at respective power levels and phases via a plurality of antennas disposed in the predefined area; and comparing a predetermined location of the robot with a triangulated position of the attached radio-frequency identification tag [paragraph 40]. In some embodiments, said mapping includes traversing the predefined area with a robot with an attached radio-frequency tag; transmitting a plurality of calibration signals via the plurality of antennas at respective power levels and phases; and comparing a predetermined location of the robot with a triangulated position of the attached radio-frequency identification tag [paragraph 51], wherein the method is intended to be usable in a warehouse [paragraph 3]. As for the majority of the claim language, the claims are describing triangulation);
identifying an RFID-tag-signal from an RFID tag that is associated with a pedestrian in the first-RFID-signalling (In some embodiments, the method further comprises disposing a calibration radio-frequency identification tag on a person and determining a location of the person as the person traverses the predetermined location [paragraph 42]. In some embodiments, the method further comprises converting the second response signal from the radio-frequency identification tag from an analog signal into a digital signal in order to identify a radio-frequency identification tag number [paragraph 27]);
identifying an RFID-tag-signal from the RFID tag that is associated with the pedestrian in the second-RFID-signalling (paragraphs 27 and 42); and
determining a location of the pedestrian with reference to the vehicle based on the RFID- tag-signals in both the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling (In accordance with an aspect disclosed herein, there is set forth a computer implemented method suitable for implementation on a processor comprising analyzing first and second response signals via a plurality of antennas from the radio-frequency identification tag; and triangulating a position of the radio-frequency identification tag based upon said analyzing, wherein said analyzing and triangulating are performed by a processor [paragraph 44]. In the case of time difference of arrival (TDOA – a known method for tag location), a signal is sent to an RFID tag from one of three antennas. The tag receives the signal and transmits a signal in response. The response signal is then received at all three of the antennas at different times. The time between original signal transmission and reception of the response signal at each antenna can be used to determine the distance from the tag to each antenna, which can then be used to locate the RFID tag (relative to the antennas) using trilateration [paragraph 71]).
Hewett does not teach:
The first and second RFID antennas are mounted on a vehicle.
However, Stubbs teaches:
The first and second RFID antennas are mounted on a vehicle (FIG. 4 shows a person with a number of RFID tags on a worker at 102, and a robot at 120 which has RFID tags on the robot at 305. The warehouse worker, warehouse robot, or both can also include one or more RFID readers to identify nearby tags, verify tags, and establish virtual work zones as necessary [paragraph 17]. FIG. 4 of Stubbs also shows a setup in which a robot features at least 2 RFID antennas, and describes a process in FIG. 9 in which the robot determines and maintains its distance from the human worker, taking evasive action at 930).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Hewett with the first and second RFID antennas are mounted on a vehicle as taught by Stubbs so as to allow a robot or other type of vehicle on a warehouse floor to avoid colliding with human workers, as taught by Stubbs.
Claim(s) 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hewett US 20190331785 A1 (“Hewett”) in combination with Stubbs et al. US 20160271800 A1 (“Stubbs”) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Stortstrom et al. US 20190087925 A1 (“Stortstrom”).
Regarding Claim 8. Hewett in combination with Stubbs teaches the controller of claim 6.
Hewett does not teach:
wherein each of the plurality of RFID-tag-signals includes:
a garment-identifier that is associated with a garment that can be worn by the pedestrian.
However, Stortstrom teaches:
wherein each of the plurality of RFID-tag-signals includes:
a garment-identifier that is associated with a garment that can be worn by the pedestrian (The illustrated RFID reader 80 may subsequently detect RFID tags that are present on the individual 50, or that are integrated on protective equipment worn by the individual 50, and transmit the scanned information to a server, which compares the received scanned information to a stored list of PPE's that are required for specific restricted area 40. If a determination is made that the individual 50 does not possess one or more of the required protective equipment, a visual alarm may be presented on the display 20 indicating that access to restricted area 40 has failed because the required protective equipment was not detected by the RFID reader 80 [paragraph 16]. For example if, based on the nature of the restricted area 40, it is necessary for the individual 50 to wear a safety hard hat, safety boots, a utility belt, and safety goggles, the 3D camera 70 may perform a full body scan of the individual 50 and detect any indicia that may be present on the body of the individual 50 or equipment being worn by the individual 50 [paragraph 12]. The scanned image may preferably be transmitted to a server 210 (FIG. 2) and compared to images stored in the server such as, for example, the server 210 (FIG. 2) to determine if location-specific protective equipment is worn by the individual in processing block 320 [paragraph 27]. If the equipment has location-specific identifiers, then the identifiers are specifically associated with a particular garment).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Hewett with wherein each of the plurality of RFID-tag-signals includes: a garment-identifier that is associated with a garment that can be worn by the pedestrian as taught by Stortstrom so as to allow the system to detect when specific RFID tags are applied. This would be particularly useful if the robot or vehicle is intended to identify specific garments, as taught by Stortstrom.
Regarding Claim 9. Hewett in combination with Stubbs and Stortstrom teaches the controller of claim 8.
Hewett does not teach:
wherein each of the plurality of RFID-tag-signals further includes:
a garment-position-identifier that is indicative of a position on the garment at which the respective RFID tag is attached.
However, Stortstrom teaches:
wherein each of the plurality of RFID-tag-signals further includes:
a garment-position-identifier that is indicative of a position on the garment at which the respective RFID tag is attached (The illustrated RFID reader 80 may subsequently detect RFID tags that are present on the individual 50, or that are integrated on protective equipment worn by the individual 50, and transmit the scanned information to a server, which compares the received scanned information to a stored list of PPE's that are required for specific restricted area 40. If a determination is made that the individual 50 does not possess one or more of the required protective equipment, a visual alarm may be presented on the display 20 indicating that access to restricted area 40 has failed because the required protective equipment was not detected by the RFID reader 80 [paragraph 16]. For example if, based on the nature of the restricted area 40, it is necessary for the individual 50 to wear a safety hard hat, safety boots, a utility belt, and safety goggles, the 3D camera 70 may perform a full body scan of the individual 50 and detect any indicia that may be present on the body of the individual 50 or equipment being worn by the individual 50 [paragraph 12]. The scanned image may preferably be transmitted to a server 210 (FIG. 2) and compared to images stored in the server such as, for example, the server 210 (FIG. 2) to determine if location-specific protective equipment is worn by the individual in processing block 320 [paragraph 27]. The scanned image may be transmitted to a server 210 (FIG. 2) and compared to images stored in the server 210 (FIG. 2) to determine if location-specific protective equipment is worn by the individual in processing block 420 [paragraph 37], which means that a position identifier must be included in this method).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Hewett with wherein each of the plurality of RFID-tag-signals further includes: a garment-position-identifier that is indicative of a position on the garment at which the respective RFID tag is attached as taught by Stortstrom so as to allow the system to ensure that the correct garments are worn correctly.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hewett US 20190331785 A1 (“Hewett”) in combination with Stubbs et al. US 20160271800 A1 (“Stubbs”) and Stortstrom et al. US 20190087925 A1 (“Stortstrom”) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of DeVries et al. US 20190285748 A1 (“DeVries”).
Regarding Claim 10. Hewett in combination with Stubbs and Stortstrom teaches the controller of claim 9.
Hewett does not teach:
further configured to:
identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from a respective plurality of RFID tags in each of the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling that have the same garment-identifier;
process the garment-position-identifier in each of the identified plurality of RFID-tag- signals to determine an orientation of the pedestrian that is wearing the garment with respect to the vehicle; and
provide an output-signal based on the determined orientation of the pedestrian.
However, Stubbs teaches:
further configured to:
identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from a respective plurality of RFID tags in each of the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling that have the same garment-identifier (Multiple RFID tags can be worn by a person, as shown in FIG. 5A. At 135, the robot 120 can detect the presence of a worker 102 due to RFID interaction between the robot 120 and the worker 102. In other words, depending on the configuration, if the robot 120 senses, by an RFID reader, one or more RFID tags associated with a worker 102, this indicates that the robot 120 is within the worker's work zone 105 and/or that the worker 102 is in the robot's work zone 105 [paragraph 24]);
process the garment-position-identifier in each of the identified plurality of RFID-tag- signals to determine a position of the pedestrian that is wearing the garment with respect to the vehicle (FIG. 4 shows a person with a number of RFID tags on a worker at 102, and a robot at 120 which has RFID tags on the robot at 305. The warehouse worker, warehouse robot, or both can also include one or more RFID readers to identify nearby tags, verify tags, and establish virtual work zones as necessary [paragraph 17]. FIG. 4 of Stubbs also shows a setup in which a robot features at least 2 RFID antennas, and describes a process in FIG. 9 in which the robot determines and maintains its distance from the human worker, taking evasive action at 930); and
provide an output-signal based on the determined position of the pedestrian (in some examples, the fiducials 175 can also include RFID tags 305 to provide location information to RFID readers 310 on the robots 120 and/or workers 102 to establish the range of the RFID readers. When the RFID reader reports to the central control 115, for example, it can include all of the fiducials 175 it can “see” at any given time. Based on location information associated with the reported fiducials 175, therefore, the central control 115 can determine the range of a particular RFID reader 310 or the average range of all RFID readers 310 in the system 300, 400, for example [paragraph 60]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Hewett with further configured to: identify a plurality of RFID-tag-signals from a respective plurality of RFID tags in each of the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling that have the same garment-identifier; process the garment-position-identifier in each of the identified plurality of RFID-tag- signals to determine an orientation of the pedestrian that is wearing the garment with respect to the vehicle; and provide an output-signal based on the determined orientation of the pedestrian as taught by Stubbs so as to allow the system to detect multiple tags in case one or more of the tags should fail or not be able to transmit the signal from a particular angle, which Stubbs discloses as a potential problem in paragraph 54.
Hewett in combination with Stubbs do not teach:
The RFID signals are used to determine the orientation as well.
However, DeVries teaches:
The RFID signals are used to determine the orientation as well (The communications with the RFID device 330 may include obtaining an identification code pertaining to an identity of the RFID device 330. For instance, the speed of motion of the RFID device 330 and the direction of travel of the RFID device 330 (e.g., a velocity vector) may be determined based on the sensor information obtained with respect to a plurality of the antennas 310 [paragraph 62]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Hewett with the RFID signals are used to determine the orientation as well as taught by DeVries so as to allow the system to detect the direction and facing of a person or other mobile object in the warehouse with reference to the robot.
Claim(s) 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stortstrom et al. US 20190087925 A1 (“Stortstrom”).
Regarding Claim 21. Stortstrom teaches the controller of claim 18.
Stortstrom also teaches:
wherein:
the first RFID antenna has a field of view associated with a first entrance / exit side of the pedestrian access point in the warehouse (An illustrated PPE checker 10 may also include a Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) reader 80 that reads an RFID tag (not shown) that may be integrated with a personal badge of the individual 50. Alternately, the RFID tag may be paired with individual protective equipment elements. For example, RFID tags may be integrated with protective equipment such as safety hard hats, safety boots, utility belts, and safety goggles [paragraph 15]. One or more RFID readers may be installed within the restricted areas [paragraph 23], implying multiple readers can be used);
wherein the controller is further configured to:
process the first-RFID-signalling and the second-RFID-signalling to identify any RFID- tag-signals from one or more respective RFID tags in the first-RFID-signalling and include a PPE-identifier that is associated with an item of PPE that can be worn by the pedestrian; and
determine whether or not any identified RFID-tag-signals in the first-RFID-signalling represent the complete set of PPE items for the pedestrian.
Stortstrom does not teach:
wherein the controller is further configured to:
receive second-RFID-signalling from a second RFID antenna that has a field of view associated with a second entrance / exit side of the pedestrian access point;
and the second- RFID-signalling that are: associated with the pedestrian identified as passing through the pedestrian access point; and
determine whether or not any identified RFID-tag-signals in the second-RFID-signalling represent the complete set of PPE items for the pedestrian.
However, this claim language is merely duplication of parts, as previously defined in In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), wherein the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. Since no new or unexpected result has been described in the specification regarding the claimed elements, these elements would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON G CAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-7009. The examiner can normally be reached Monday: 7:30am - 4:30pm EST to Friday 7:30pm - 4:30am.
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, Wade Miles can be reached at (571) 270-7777. 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.
/AARON G CAIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights