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
Claims were amended before first action.
Claims 1-15 were Cancelled.
Claim 16-30 are new and are pending.
Claim Interpretation
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. Under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time. The ordinary and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including the words of the claims themselves, the specification, drawings, and prior art. However, the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification - the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification serves as a glossary for the claim terms. The words of the claim must be given their plain meaning unless the plain meaning is inconsistent with the specification. 2111.01 (I). See also In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 799, 802, 218 USPQ 289, 292 (Fed. Cir. 1983) ("'[C]laims are not to be read in a vacuum, and limitations therein are to be interpreted in light of the specification in giving them their ‘broadest reasonable interpretation.'"2111.01 (II).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 16-18 and 20-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal [US20190137991, now Agarwal, with Jacobus et al. [US10346797, now Jacobus].
1. - 15. (Cancelled)
Claim 16
Agarwal discloses an autonomous lift truck [see at least Agarwal, Fig. 1, 7, and 16] comprising:
a vertically mobile fork equipped with at least two blades for lifting loads; a drive system for moving the lift truck [see at least Agarwal, Fig. 1, 7, 13, and 16; abstract (“wherein the operator input comprises one of an object pick up command and an object drop off command.”); ¶ 0053 (“a lift truck control system”)]; ;
a control unit able to command operation of the drive system for autonomously guiding the lift truck and able to command vertical movement of the vertically mobile fork [see at least Agarwal, ¶ 0025 (discusses the uses of a controller when operating a fork lift)]; and
a contactless load-detection device, the contactless load-detection device being able to move together with the vertically mobile fork and positioned above the at least two blades of the vertically mobile fork, the contactless load-detection device being able to emit a beam of light that sweeps at least a predefined planar detection zone situated above at least one of the blades so as to detect a presence or absence of a load that is to be lifted [see at least Agarwal, Fig. 7; ¶ 0046 (discusses using image data to detect objects, this is a similar concept to using light beams -see second ART for beam); 0050 (detecting load); 0053 (further detecting surrounding and load); 0090 (“ At 908, it is determined whether a load has been detected on the forks. If it is determined that no load has been detected, the algorithm returns to 908, otherwise the algorithm proceeds to 910.”); 0097 (“The algorithmic controls can use voice activation, physical inputs to the wearable device or other suitable inputs, and the control system can be algorithmically configured to cause the lift truck to follow the operator in a leader-follower manner by responding to the motion commands.”); 0109 (“ system to obtain image data and detect unique identifying information from the image data of the order picker's visual appearance.”); Note Agarwal teaches an image detection system not a light beam but the concept of controlling a fork lift using sensors is covered.] ,
wherein the control unit receives information indicative of the presence or absence of the load that is to be lifted in the predefined planar detection zone from the contactless load- detection device and is able to command the operation of the drive system and the vertical movement of the vertically mobile fork on the basis of the information [see at least Agarwal, Abstract; ¶ 0029-0030 (discusses gathering sensor information and using that in determining what is needed to control one or more fork lifts); 0090; 0097].
Agarwal does not specifically teach but Jacobus does teach a contactless load-detection device, the contactless load-detection device being able to move together with the vertically mobile fork and positioned above the at least two blades of the vertically mobile fork, the contactless load-detection device being able to emit a beam of light that sweeps at least a predefined planar detection zone situated above at least one of the blades so as to detect a presence or absence of a load that is to be lifted, especially the use of beams for gathering data and requiring a planar/flat detection zone [see at least Jacobus, Fig. 10; Col. 9, line 43 – Col 10, line 3 (discusses using a beam of light/laser as a sensor to determine obstacles and areas within an area); Col. 14, lines 27-43 (discusses “sensor of beam-formed focal plane”)].
Jacobus also teaches control of the fork lift as shown in the last limitation [see at least Jacobus, Col. 5, lines 6-17].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 17
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck of Claim 16.
Agarwal further discloses a load-detection device [see at least Agarwal, ¶ 0081 (“ exemplary obstacle zone detection system”)].
Jacobus more specifically teaches the predefined planar detection zone swept by the beam of light emitted by the contactless load-detection device is horizontal [see at least Jacobus, Fig. 9B; col. 5. Lines 45-46].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 18
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck of Claim 16.
Agarwal further discloses the vertically mobile fork comprises at least two uprights supporting the at least two blades, the contactless load-detection device being placed on one of the at least two uprights [see at least Agarwal, Fig. 1.].
Jacobus also teaches this limitation [see at least Jacobus, Fig. 1].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 20
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck of Claim 16.
Agarwal further discloses an on-board locator device configured to acquire position data pertaining to a position of the lift truck and communicating with the control unit, the contactless load-detection device being distinct from the locator device [see at least Agarwal, ¶ 0035 (discusses detection of fuel or other issues with the fork lift and notifying the operators that an action will take place); 0064*0065 (“discusses location of lift and pallet as well as the sensors configured to transfer information’)].
Jacobus also teaches this limitation [see at least Jacobus, Col. 5, lines 57-58 (“FIG. 15 shows location fusion based on localization features, GPS, and Dead Reckoning”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 21
Note that Claim 21 is being examined as an independent method claim that uses independent Claim 16 as a base for the method.
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck of Claim 16. All the method limitations are discussed in Claim 16 but for clarity will further expand the rejection.
Agarwal further discloses a step of positioning of the at least two blades of the vertically mobile fork with respect to the load [see at least Agarwal, Fig. 1, ¶ 0050 (“detect a load”)];
at least a first step of detecting the load using the contactless load-detection device; a step of lifting the load if the load is detected in at least a first predefined planar detection zone swept by the beam of light emitted by the contactless load-detection device in the first detecting step; and a step of moving the autonomous lift truck and of transporting the load [see at least Agarwal, ¶ 0025 (“ transport the pallet to another location and deposit it “);0050 (“whether a pallet of goods has been loaded, or other suitable conditions.”)].
Jacobus more specifically teaches the predefined planar detection zone swept by the beam of light emitted by the contactless load-detection device [see at least Jacobus, Col. 14, lines 27-43 (discusses the use of beams/Lazers to determine, space, objects, etc. which would include status of the load)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 22
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck (Claim 16) and method of Claim 21.
Agarwal further discloses a the first predefined detection zone [see at least Agarwal, Fig. 7; ¶ 0057 (describes bases for different zones within a space used by the fork lifts)].
Jacobus more specifically teaches the first predefined detection zone is defined by four points delimiting a rectangle [see at least Jacobus, Col. 10, line 34- col. 11, line 3 (uses four corners “rectangle” to determine location)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 23
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck (Claim 16) and method of Claim 21.
Agarwal further discloses prior to the step of lifting the load, a second step of successive detection of the load by the contactless load-detection device, the step of lifting the load being performed if the load is detected during the second detection step [see at least Agarwal, abstract; ¶ 0025 (describes continuous checking of load, location, progress, etc. of the fork lift and its load)].
Claim 24
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck (Claim 16) and method of Claim 21.
Agarwal further discloses the step of lifting the load is performed after a timeout step, which is performed after the first detecting step [see at least Agarwal, ¶ 0086 (discusses detection of load and fork lift for safety.)].
Claim 25
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck (Claim 16) and method of Claim 21.
Agarwal further discloses the second load-detection step is performed in at least a second predefined detection zone situated inside the first detection zone on a side of the contactless load-detection device [see at least Agarwal, ¶ 0033 (detection and “actuation for emergency notification control”)].
Jacobus more specifically teaches a predefined path [see at least Jacobus, Col. 6, lines 41-53].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 26
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck (Claim 16) and method of Claim 21.
Agarwal further discloses the load-detection step is performed in a planar detection zone that is common to the at least two blades of the vertically mobile fork [see at least Agarwal, Fig. 7; ¶ 0025].
Claim 27
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck (Claim 16) and method of Claim 21.
Agarwal further discloses the load-detection step is performed in two planar detection zones, each specific to one of the at least two blades of the vertically mobile fork [see at least Agarwal, Fig. 7; ¶ 0057 (describes bases for different zones within a space used by the fork lifts)].
Jacobus also teaches this limitation [see at least Jacobus, Col. 10, line 34- col. 11, line 3 (uses four corners “rectangle” to determine location)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 28
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck (Claim 16) and method of Claim 21.
Agarwal further discloses during the step of moving the autonomous lift truck and of transporting the load, a sub-step of checking rotation of the load, performed by the contactless load-detection device, the checking of the rotation of the load being performed with respect to each detection zone that is specific to one of the at least two blades of the vertically mobile fork, the step of moving the autonomous lift truck and of transporting the load being halted if the load is not detected in the two detection zones simultaneously [see at least Agarwal, Fig. 1; Abstract; ¶ 0025; 003 (inactivating, which is the same as stop for emergencies or to avoid collisions)].
Jacobus also teaches this limitation [see at least Jacobus, Abstract; Col. 1, line 66- col. 2, line 18 (is a general discussion of existing art describing this limitation)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 29
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck (Claim 16) and method of Claim 21.
Agarwal further discloses during the step of moving the autonomous lift truck and of transporting the load, a sub-step of checking of a position of the load, performed by the contactless load-detection device, the checking of the position of the load being performed with respect to the first detection zone, the step of moving the autonomous lift truck and of transporting the load being halted if the load is not detected in the first detection zone [see at least Agarwal, ¶ 0036 (inactivate); 0065 (discusses features of the sensors and control of the fork lift)].
Jacobus also teaches this limitation [see at least Jacobus, Col. 2, lines 19-39 (discusses more and more specific details of controlling the fork lift using sensors including light beams)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 30
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck (Claim 16) and method of Claim 21.
Agarwal does not specifically disclose but Jacobus does teach, during the step of moving the autonomous lift truck and of transporting the load, a sub-step of checking of a position of the load, performed by the contactless load-detection device, the checking of the position of the load being performed with respect to at least one predefined detection zone indicative of a slippage of the load and situated outside the first detection zone on a side of the contactless load-detection device, the step of moving the autonomous lift truck and of transporting the load being halted if the load is detected in the predefined detection zone indicative of a slippage of the load [see at least Jacobus, Col. 2, lines 19-39 (discusses load position)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal [US20190137991, now Agarwal, with Jacobus et al. [US10346797, now Jacobus], further with Jay [US3503519, now Jay].
Claim 19
Agarwal and Jacobus disclose/teach the autonomous lift truck of Claim 18.
Agarwal teaches some of the features in comprising an end-stop placed on each of the uprights of the vertically mobile fork and mounted with an ability to pivot between a deployed position corresponding to a load that is absent or not in abutment against an end-stop, and a retracted position corresponding to a load that is in abutment against an end-stop, the contactless load-detection device placed on an upright being situated above an associated end-stop [see at least Fig. 1; ¶ 0036 (discusses controller that can detect load and act on the status)].
Jacobus also taches some of the features. Jacobus teaches sensors on the forks achieving a similar outcome [see at least Jacobus, Fig. 1; Col. 2, lines 51-67].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Neither Agarwal or Jacobus discloses/teaches but Jay specifically teaches comprising an end-stop placed on each of the uprights of the vertically mobile fork and mounted with an ability to pivot between a deployed position corresponding to a load that is absent or not in abutment against an end-stop, and a retracted position corresponding to a load that is in abutment against an end-stop, the contactless load-detection device placed on an upright being situated above an associated end-stop [see at least Jay, Fig. 2, part 27; Col. 3, line 1- 10.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the fork lift remote control or autonomous control of Agarwal, with the more specific use of beams of light as sensors to help control a fork lift. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer atmosphere where fork lifts are used extensively.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Watts [US 9561941]
Abstract: the method further includes identifying the object to be picked up and a particular side of the object under which to place the one or more lift elements of the vehicle. The method additionally includes determining an approach path toward the object for the vehicle to follow to place the lift elements of the vehicle under the particular side of the object. The method further includes causing the vehicle to move along the determined approach path toward the object. The method additionally includes determining that the lift elements of the vehicle are placed under the particular side of the object. The method also includes causing the vehicle to lift the object with the lift elements.
Sellner [US 20200387154]
[0002] The present inventive concepts relate to the field of systems and methods in the field of storage facility management, and more particularly to systems and methods involved in case picking or selection of goods in a warehouse environment.
S. Teller et al., "A voice-commandable robotic forklift working alongside humans in minimally-prepared outdoor environments," 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Anchorage, AK, USA, 2010, pp. 526-533.
Brunete A, Gambao E, Hernando M, Cedazo R. “Smart Assistive Architecture for the Integration of IoT Devices, Robotic Systems, and Multimodal Interfaces in Healthcare Environments. Sensors” (Basel). 2021 Mar 22;21(6):2212.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOAN T GOODBODY whose telephone number is (571) 270-7952. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH 7-3 (US Eastern time).
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 https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, RACHID BENDIDI can be reached at (571) 272-4896. 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 https://ppair-my.uspot.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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 the USPTO Customer Serie Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/JOAN T GOODBODY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
(571) 270-7952
Prosecution Insights