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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/09/2024, 09/04/2025, and 02/03/2026 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 § 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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis – Step 1
Claim 1 is directed to an excavation route generation system (i.e., an apparatus). Therefore, claim 1 is within one of the four statutory categories.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
The examiner has identified method claim 1 as the claim that represents the claimed invention for analysis. Claim 1 recites:
An excavation route generation system for a working machine including a machine main body and an attachment attached to the machine main body and having a bucket for excavating an excavation object, the excavation route generation system comprising:
a property acquisition part that acquires information about a property of the excavation object including hardness of the excavation object; and
an excavation route generation part that generates an excavation route being a target route of the bucket in excavating the excavation object, wherein
the excavation route generation part sets an excavation depth of the bucket with respect to a surface of the excavation object in accordance with the hardness of the excavation object acquired by the property acquisition part.
The examiner submits that foregoing the bolded claim limitations constitute a “mental process” as the claims cover performance of the limitations in the human mind, given the broadest reasonable interpretation. For example, “an excavation route generation part that generates an excavation route being a target route of the bucket in excavating the excavation object, wherein the excavation route generation part sets an excavation depth of the bucket with respect to a surface of the excavation object in accordance with the hardness of the excavation object acquired by the property acquisition part.” in the context of this claim encompasses a person looking at data to determine the target route needed to complete the excavation activity.
Accordingly, claim 1 recites an abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application include: (1) Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05.f), (2) Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP 2106.05.h).
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”):
An excavation route generation system for a working machine including a machine main body and an attachment attached to the machine main body and having a bucket for excavating an excavation object, the excavation route generation system comprising:
a property acquisition part that acquires information about a property of the excavation object including hardness of the excavation object; and
an excavation route generation part that generates an excavation route being a target route of the bucket in excavating the excavation object, wherein
the excavation route generation part sets an excavation depth of the bucket with respect to a surface of the excavation object in accordance with the hardness of the excavation object acquired by the property acquisition part.
Regarding the additional limitation of “a property acquisition part that acquires information about a property of the excavation object including hardness of the excavation object;” the examiner submits that this limitation is an example of mere data gathering. In particular, the receiving information about a property of the excavation object as an input is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity.
Regarding the additional limitation of “An excavation route generation system for a working machine including a machine main body and an attachment attached to the machine main body and having a bucket for excavating an excavation object” the examiner submits that this limitation does not integrate the judicial exception into practical application because it is generally linking additional elements to a technological environment, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05.f).
Thus, taken alone, the additional limitations as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitations add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect 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 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 a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05). Accordingly, the additional limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
Step 2B of the Revised Guidance analyzes the claims to determine if the claims recite additional limitations that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
When considered individually or in combination, the additional limitations of claim 1 do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons discussed above as to why the additional limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into practical application. The additional limitations of claim 1 are examples of adding insignificant extra-solution activity (pre-solution and/or post-solution) to the judicial exception as it is mere data gathering.
Dependent claims 2-11 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claims to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of the dependent claims further narrow the “excavation route generation” element of claim 1 that was considered to be a mental process; thus the description of such element does not take claims 2-11 out the realm of mental process. Therefore, dependent claims 2-11 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of claim 1.
Dependent claim 12 does not recite any further limitations that cause the claims to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of the dependent claim further narrows the “working machine” element of claim 1 that was considered to be linking additional elements to a technological environment; thus the description of such element does not take claim 12 out the realm of mental process. Therefore, dependent claim 12 is not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SANO et al. (US 20200011029 A1).
Regarding claim 1,
SANO teaches:
An excavation route generation system for a working machine including a machine main body and an attachment attached to the machine main body and having a bucket for excavating an excavation object, the excavation route generation system comprising:
(SANO – Fig. 1, see below, main body 3, attachment with a bucket 6)
PNG
media_image1.png
436
624
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a property acquisition part that acquires information about a property of the excavation object including hardness of the excavation object; and
(SANO – Paragraph [0088] states “The external processing device 30E derives the hardness of the ground to be excavated (including, for example, the characteristics of soil, rock, gravel, or the like) based on the insertion depth h of the teeth tips of the bucket 6 and the insertion resistance (excavation reaction force Fz) at the excavation initial stage.”)
an excavation route generation part that generates an excavation route being a target route of the bucket in excavating the excavation object, wherein
(SANO – Fig. 9, see below)
PNG
media_image2.png
654
318
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the excavation route generation part sets an excavation depth of the bucket with respect to a surface of the excavation object in accordance with the hardness of the excavation object acquired by the property acquisition part.
(SANO – Paragraph [0093] states “Thereafter, the external processing device 30E derives a target excavation depth H based on the hardness K of the excavation target. The target excavation depth H means an excavation depth at which an efficient excavating motion can be achieved without causing a situation where the bucket 6 is immobilized during an excavating motion.”)
Regarding claim 2,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 1.
SANO further teaches:
in accordance with the hardness of the excavation object acquired by the property acquisition part, the excavation route generation part sets:
an initial excavation depth being an excavation depth at a finish of an insertion operation of inserting the bucket in the excavation object; and
(SANO – Fig. 7A-7D, see below. Paragraph [0083] states “Here, an excavation stage including the three stages of an excavation initial stage, an excavation middle stage, and an excavation late stage is described with reference to FIGS. 7A through 7D. FIGS. 7A through 7D are diagrams illustrating the excavation stage. FIG. 7A illustrates the relationship between the bucket 6 and the excavation target ground at the excavation initial stage…” Paragraph [0088] further states “The external processing device 30E derives the hardness of the ground to be excavated (including, for example, the characteristics of soil, rock, gravel, or the like) based on the insertion depth h of the teeth tips of the bucket 6 and the insertion resistance (excavation reaction force Fz) at the excavation initial stage.”)
PNG
media_image3.png
770
517
media_image3.png
Greyscale
a final excavation depth being an excavation depth at a start of a scooping operation of scooping the bucket upward from an inside of the excavation object through the surface.
(SANO – Fig. 7, see below. Paragraph [0083] states “ Here, an excavation stage including the three stages of an excavation initial stage, an excavation middle stage, and an excavation late stage is described with reference to FIGS. 7A through 7D. FIGS. 7A through 7D are diagrams illustrating the excavation stage… FIG. 7C illustrates the relationship between the bucket 6 and the excavation target ground at the excavation late stage.” Paragraph [0096] further states “Specifically, FIG. 7D illustrates that a horizontal distance from a position Pa where the teeth tips of the bucket 6 enter the excavation target during the excavation initial stage to a position Pb where the teeth tips of the bucket 6 exit the excavation target during the excavation late stage is the target excavation length L. FIG. 7D also illustrates a state after excavation has been appropriately performed in such a manner as to cause the excavation volume to be the target excavation volume Vt (=the target excavation depth H×the target excavation length L×the bucket width W×the collection rate η).”)
Regarding claim 3,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 2.
SANO teaches:
wherein the excavation route generation part sets a difference between the initial excavation depth and the final excavation depth in accordance with the hardness of the excavation object acquired by the property acquisition part.
(SANO – Paragraph [0101] states “In response to determining that a current excavation stage is the excavation initial stage (YES at step ST1), the external processing device 30E derives the hardness K of the excavation target (step ST2)… The same applies to other parameters such as the target excavation depth H. Thereafter, the external processing device 30E derives the target excavation depth H based on the hardness K of the excavation target (step ST3). According to this embodiment, the external processing device 30E derives the target excavation depth H, referring to a target excavation depth table storing the correspondence relationship between the hardness K and the target excavation depth H. The target excavation depth H may be derived using a predetermined calculation formula.” Note: The examiner interprets the target depth as the final excavation depth.)
Regarding claim 4,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 1.
SANO further teaches:
wherein the excavation route generation part sets the excavation depth to a first excavation depth when the hardness of the excavation object acquired by the property acquisition part indicates first hardness, and
the excavation route generation part sets the excavation depth to a second excavation depth which is smaller than the first excavation depth when the hardness of the excavation object acquired by the property acquisition part indicates second hardness which is higher than the first hardness.
(SANO – Fig. 8, see below. Paragraph [0101] states “In response to determining that a current excavation stage is the excavation initial stage (YES at step ST1), the external processing device 30E derives the hardness K of the excavation target (step ST2). According to this embodiment, the external processing device 30E derives the hardness K of the excavation target, referring to the hardness table storing the correspondence relationship between the insertion depth h, the excavation reaction force Fz, and the hardness K… According to this embodiment, the external processing device 30E derives the target excavation depth H, referring to a target excavation depth table storing the correspondence relationship between the hardness K and the target excavation depth H. The target excavation depth H may be derived using a predetermined calculation formula.”)
PNG
media_image4.png
321
485
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 1.
SANO further teaches:
wherein the excavation route generation part sets, in accordance with the excavation depth, an excavation distance being a moving distance of the bucket in forward and rearward directions from a state of the bucket having been inserted in the excavation object to a state of the bucket before to be scooped upward from an inside of the excavation object through the surface.
(SANO – Paragraph [0106] states “The excavation assisting function is, for example, a function to assist an excavating motion by causing the excavation attachment to operate semi-automatically. In this case, for example, the external processing device 30E automatically raises or lowers the boom 4 so as to cause the excavation depth from the latest excavation surface (ground surface) that is a current excavation surface to be the target excavation depth H, while an arm closing operation is being performed during the excavation middle stage. The external processing device 30E may automatically open or close the bucket 6. Specifically, when the excavation depth is likely to exceed the target excavation depth H, the external processing device 30E may automatically raise the boom 4 so as to prevent the target excavation depth H from being exceeded. Alternatively, when the excavation depth is unlikely to reach the target excavation depth H, the external processing device 30E may automatically lower the boom 4 so that the target excavation depth H is reached. The same applies to the opening and closing of the bucket 6. Furthermore, the external processing device 30E may adjust the closing speed of the arm 5.”)
Regarding claim 6,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 5.
SANO further teaches:
wherein the excavation route generation part sets the excavation distance to a first excavation distance when setting the excavation depth to a first excavation depth, and
the excavation route generation part sets the excavation distance to a second excavation distance which is longer than the first excavation distance when setting the excavation depth to a second excavation depth which is smaller than the first excavation depth.
(SANO – Paragraph [0097-0098] states “When a target work surface is set as a finished surface, the external processing device 30E may derive multiple target excavation depths H stepwise between a current excavation surface (ground surface) and the target work surface. The controller 30 of the shovel 100 can thus perform such control as to prevent the teeth tips of the bucket 6, which are a working part, from exceeding the target excavation depths H set in a stepwise manner. Next, a process of assisting an excavating motion with the excavation attachment by the external processing device 30E (hereinafter, “excavation assisting process”) is described with reference to FIG. 9. FIG. 9 is a flowchart illustrating an example of the excavation assisting process. The external processing device 30E repeatedly executes this excavation assisting process at predetermined control intervals while the shovel 100 is in operation. The external processing device 30E may execute it only when determining that the shovel 100 is in operation.”)
Regarding claim 7,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 5.
SANO further teaches:
wherein the excavation route generation part sets the excavation distance so that a volume of the excavation object to be excavated by the bucket reaches a target excavation volume which is determined on the basis of a capacity of the bucket.
(SANO – Paragraph [0103] states “Thereafter, the external processing device 30E derives the target excavation volume Vt based on the density ρ (step ST5). The target excavation volume Vt is derived as a value less than or equal to the allowable load volume of the bucket 6.” Paragraph [0106] states “The excavation assisting function is, for example, a function to assist an excavating motion by causing the excavation attachment to operate semi-automatically. In this case, for example, the external processing device 30E automatically raises or lowers the boom 4 so as to cause the excavation depth from the latest excavation surface (ground surface) that is a current excavation surface to be the target excavation depth H, while an arm closing operation is being performed during the excavation middle stage. The external processing device 30E may automatically open or close the bucket 6. Specifically, when the excavation depth is likely to exceed the target excavation depth H, the external processing device 30E may automatically raise the boom 4 so as to prevent the target excavation depth H from being exceeded. Alternatively, when the excavation depth is unlikely to reach the target excavation depth H, the external processing device 30E may automatically lower the boom 4 so that the target excavation depth H is reached. The same applies to the opening and closing of the bucket 6. Furthermore, the external processing device 30E may adjust the closing speed of the arm 5.”)
Regarding claim 8,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 1.
SANO further teaches:
wherein the property acquisition part acquires the hardness of the excavation object on the basis of a reaction force received by the bucket from the excavation object.
(SANO – Fig. 8, see above)
Regarding claim 9,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 8.
SANO further teaches:
wherein the excavation route generation part sets, as the excavation depth of the bucket with respect to the surface of the excavation object, an insertion amount of the bucket into the excavation object when the reaction force received by the bucket from the excavation object exceeds a reaction force threshold preset in the excavation route generation part.
(SANO – Paragraph [0079] states “According to this embodiment, the excavation reaction force deriving part 34 derives the excavation reaction force at predetermined operation intervals using a predetermined calculation formula. For example, the excavation reaction force deriving part 34 derives the excavation reaction force such that the excavation reaction force increases as the excavation depth increases, that is, as the vertical distance between the ground contact surface of the shovel 100 and the bucket teeth tips position P4 (see FIG. 2) increases. Furthermore, the excavation reaction force deriving part 34 derives the excavation reaction force such that, for example, the excavation reaction force increases as the ground insertion depth of the teeth tips of the bucket 6 relative to the excavation target ground increases…”)
Regarding claim 10,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 1.
SANO further teaches:
wherein the excavation route generation part limits the excavation depth on the basis of an excavation depth limit value preset in the excavation route generation part.
(SANO – Fig. 8, see above. Paragraph [0101] states “In response to determining that a current excavation stage is the excavation initial stage (YES at step ST1), the external processing device 30E derives the hardness K of the excavation target (step ST2). According to this embodiment, the external processing device 30E derives the hardness K of the excavation target, referring to the hardness table storing the correspondence relationship between the insertion depth h, the excavation reaction force Fz, and the hardness K… According to this embodiment, the external processing device 30E derives the target excavation depth H, referring to a target excavation depth table storing the correspondence relationship between the hardness K and the target excavation depth H. The target excavation depth H may be derived using a predetermined calculation formula.”)
Regarding claim 11,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 1.
SANO further teaches:
wherein the excavation route generation part corrects the excavation route set by the excavation route generation part in response to a manipulation to a manipulation device by an operator.
(SANO – Paragraph [0081] states “In response to the excavation reaction force deriving part 34 determining that excavation is in progress, the external processing device 30E derives a current excavation stage based on the details of the operator's operation” Paragraph [0140] further states “According to this embodiment, the external processing device 30E executes this vehicle assignment number calculating process while the shovel 100 is operating in a trial excavation mode. For example, the operator can switch the operating mode of the shovel 100 from a normal mode to the trial excavation mode by operating a mode switch included in a switch panel serving as the input part 42 of the image display device 40.”)
Regarding claim 12,
SANO teaches the limitations of claim 1.
SANO further teaches:
further comprising: the working machine that is provided with the property acquisition part and the excavation route generation part.
(SANO – Fig. 1, see above, main body 3, attachment with a bucket 6 Paragraph [0093] states “Thereafter, the external processing device 30E derives a target excavation depth H based on the hardness K of the excavation target.”)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH GALYN MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (703)756-1537. The examiner can normally be reached MON-THURS 9-2.
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, James Lee can be reached at (571)270-5965. 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.
/E.G.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3668 /ABDHESH K JHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights