DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This Office action is in response to the application filed on 12/23/2024, with claims 1 and 5-19 pending, with 2-4 canceled.
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 statements (IDS) submitted on 12/23/2024 and 12/01/2025 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 16, 18, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, lines 1 and 5 “robot (100)” should read -- robot --.
Claim 1, line 3 “controller (1)” should read -- controller --.
Claim 1, lines 8 and 10 “touch with the touch sensitive surface (10)” should read -- touch with the touch sensitive surface --.
Claim 5, line 2 “touch with the touch sensitive surface (10)” should read -- touch with the touch sensitive surface --.
Claim 6, line 2 “touch with the touch sensitive surface (10)” should read -- touch with the touch sensitive surface --.
Claim 7, line 2-3 “touch with the touch sensitive surface (10)” should read -- touch with the touch sensitive surface --.
Claim 12, line 1 “touch with the touch sensitive surface (10)” should read -- touch with the touch sensitive surface --.
Claim 12, line 3 “new point of origin (2)” should read -- touch with the touch sensitive surface --.
Claim 13, lines 3, 4, and 5 “touch with the touch sensitive surface (10)” should read -- touch with the touch sensitive surface --.
Claim 14, line 1 “touch with the touch sensitive surface (10)” should read -- touch with the touch sensitive surface --.
Claim 14, lines 1 “colour” should read -- color --.
Claim 14, “Method according to claim 1” should read -- The method according to claim --.
Claim 16, line 1 “Controller (1) according to claim 15” should read -- The controller according to claim 15 --.
Claim 18, line 1 “Use of the controller according to claim 15” should read -- The controller according to claim 15 --.
Claim 19, line 1 “Use of the controller according to claim 15” should read -- The controller according to claim 15 --.
Claim 19, lines 1 “colour” should read -- color --.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is directed to set of instructions. Thus, as the courts’ definitions, a software product must have a physical or tangible form in order to fall within a statutory category. In others words, software set of instructions/steps detached from any medium is an idea without physical embodiment. Hence, claim 17 does not positively recite structural limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the sensitivity of the user reference frame” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the background colour” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 1 and 5-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seydoux et al., US 2011/0221692 in view of Lee, US 2020/0050342.
Claims 1, 15 and 17. Seydoux teaches a method to control a movement of a robot (100), in particular a legged robot, comprising:
a controller (1) with a user interface unit configured to receive a user command for controlling a robot movement by applying an actuator command
t
→
=
f
v
,
w
to an actuator of the robot (100) ([0054] describes this element as such—“The drone, 10 is piloted from a remote-control appliance 16 that is an appliance having a touch screen 18 displaying the image picked up by the camera 14 on board the drone, together with various symbols superposed thereon enabling commands to be activated merely by a user's finger 20 touching the touch screen 18”. See fig. 1),
wherein the user interface unit comprises a touch sensitive surface (10) (the user interface is best illustrated fig. 1),
the method comprises the steps of:
touching the touch sensitive surface (10) and thereby setting a new point of origin (xo, yo) of a user reference frame (x, y) related to the touch sensitive surface ([0074], [0075] and [0082] describes this element as such “This icon 70 is displayed as soon as the user puts a finger on any point of a zone 68 of the screen, e.g. a vast area constituted by the right-hand half of the screen 18 with the exception of the symbols that correspond to touch commands that are already reserved (symbols 62 and 64, in particular). The icon 70 appears under the user’s finger when the user places a finger, e.g. a right thumb, on any point of the zone 68….The icon 70 is in fact made up of two icons that are initially superposed, namely a movable icon 72 and a stationary icon 74 or marker. The stationary icon 74 remains displayed at the point of initial contact of the finger on the screen, whereas the movable icon 72 follows the movements of the finger on the same screen in the vicinity of the initial contact point (the finger remaining in contact with the surface of the touch screen, while sliding over it).”),
while staying in touch with the touch sensitive surface (10), generating a user command (x1, y1) within the user reference frame (x, y) ([0080] This state lasts so long as the finger remains pressed on the zone 68, whether stationary or moving.),
translating the user command (x1, y1) into the actuator command
t
→
=
f
v
,
w
,
received by the actuator, with
v
=
f
1
y
1
w
=
f
2
x
1
and therefore into the robot movement ([0086]-[0094] teaches various commands for movement of the robot). See figs. 4-5), wherein
v
a
n
d
w
each correspond to one velocity selected out of the velocities that a robot can take within a robot reference frame
(
x
R
,
y
R
,
z
R
) ([0091]-[0094] reads on this element as such—“the command is not an on/off command, but rather a command of amplitude that is modulated as a function of the distance measured between the movable icon and the stationary icon: the command is then proportional to the distance, or indeed it could be modulated using some other relationship, e.g. a logarithmic relationship….all of the commands are accessible simultaneously and can be combined with one another….while simultaneously controlling the speed of the motor by means of the up/down command. These simple commands are transformed by the automatic pilot of the drone into complex commands”).
Seydoux teaches the concept of a user interface, touchscreen surface, commands as rejected above and switching between modes see [0067]; however, Seydoux does silent on the term velocity. Yet, Lee teaches comprising switching between alternative method steps:
translating the user command (x1, y1) into the actuator command
t
→
, and therefore into the robot movement, wherein
v
corresponds to a translational velocity
t
→
x
in heading direction
x
R
and wherein
w
corresponds to a translational velocity
t
→
x
in lateral direction
y
R
of the robot reference frame
(
x
R
,
y
R
,
z
R
) (a humanoid robot is taught in [0095] while [0062] teaches—“Still further, when the operator wiggles his/her finger on the gesture sensing feature (203) while said mouse body (202) is being moved over the tinted reference surface (205T), said 3D navigational device (202) is able to provide the absolute address (x, y, z), translational motion vector (T)…an application interface (API) that provides the motion vector(s) for moving a 3D object in linear mode (i.e., translation) and non-linear mode (e.g. rotation) simultaneously; [0064] 2. a navigational device (i.e., a 3D navigational device (202) that is capable of providing a 3D object with a 3D absolute address (i.e., (x, y, z) in FIG. 2A) directly, such that the redundant matrix transformation process from 2D to 3D can be avoided/minimized; [0065] 3. a comprehensive means of editing/modifying said two modes of motion vectors (translation and rotation) that, based on the input of the above stated 3D navigational device (202), a user can arrange/modify series of movement of said 3D object intuitively and effectively….([0096] gives a scenario that reads on this element as such—“take corner point A as an example. When an operator clicks on it and drags the presently disclosed 3D navigational device (202) on the reference surface (205T) for a distance, it will generate a corresponding translational motion vector for said point A. Thus, as FIG. 10C shows, through such a translational movement, and depending on the direction of dragging, point A can be moved to A′, A″, A′″, or A″″, etc. Correspondingly, the pattern/area of patch (1002) will be changed. Note carefully that while the pattern/area of patch (1002) is being changed by the movement of point A, the position of said vertex (1010) on patch (1002) is moved concurrently.” See fig. 2A. Taken together the following cited sections describes on this element.)”.) and
translating the user command (x1, y1) into the actuator command
t
→
, wherein
w
corresponds to an angular velocity
a
→
z
, and therefore into the robot movement of yawing around the vertical axis
z
R
of the robot reference frame
(
x
R
,
y
R
,
z
R
) (The following cited sections describes on this element as such—[0062] gives a scenario that reads on this element as such—“an application interface (API) that provides the motion vector(s) for moving a 3D object in linear mode (i.e., translation) and non-linear mode (e.g. rotation) simultaneously; [0064] 2. a navigational device (i.e., a 3D navigational device (202) that is capable of providing a 3D object with a 3D absolute address (i.e., (x, y, z) in FIG. 2A) directly, such that the redundant matrix transformation process from 2D to 3D can be avoided/minimized; [0065] 3. a comprehensive means of editing/modifying said two modes of motion vectors (translation and rotation) that, based on the input of the above stated 3D navigational device (202), a user can arrange/modify series of movement of said 3D object intuitively and effectively….([0096] gives a scenario that reads on this element as such—“take corner point A as an example. When an operator clicks on it and drags the presently disclosed 3D navigational device (202) on the reference surface (205T) for a distance, it will generate a corresponding translational motion vector for said point A. Thus, as FIG. 10C shows, through such a translational movement, and depending on the direction of dragging, point A can be moved to A′, A″, A′″, or A″″, etc. Correspondingly, the pattern/area of patch (1002) will be changed. Note carefully that while the pattern/area of patch (1002) is being changed by the movement of point A, the position of said vertex (1010) on patch (1002) is moved concurrently.” See fig. 2A. Taken together the following cited sections describes on this element.)”.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Lee with the teaching of Seydoux because such combination would provide an enhanced user-engaging experience while enabling a user to manipulate the motion of an object (See Abstract of Lee).
Claim 5. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches the method according to claim 1 and Seydoux further teaches, comprising the step of stopping the robot movement, as soon as a touch of the touch sensitive surface (10) is released ([0067] and [0081] describes this element as such—“A single press on this symbol 44 causes the drone to switch immediately to reactive mode. Releasing the symbol causes the drone to switch to autopilot mode with stabilization at the fixed point that was reached in the absence of any command, which fixed point is then kept stationary by the stabilization system incorporated in the drone…. This state lasts so long as the finger remains pressed on the zone 68, whether stationary or moving.”).
Claim 6. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches the method according to claim 1 and Seydoux further teaches, comprising the step of ignoring any further functionalities of the touch sensitive surface (10) as long as the touch is not released ([0011] along with [0033]-[0036] reads on this element as such—“Pressing the finger on this symbol causes the reactive mode to be activated immediately, and the reactive mode remains activated so long as finger contact is maintained at that location…. When remotely controlling a rotary wing drone provided with a selectively activatable system for independently stabilizing the drone in hovering flight in the absence of any command transmitted by the appliance, the independent stabilization system is advantageously deactivated in response to detecting the finger in step a), and the independent stabilization system remains deactivated after step a) throughout the duration in which the finger contact is detected, and is activated in response to detecting a loss of contact.”).
Claim 7. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches the method according to claim 1 and Seydoux further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the user command (x1, y1) is only implemented into an actuator command
t
→
if a movement of a cursor on the touch sensitive surface (10) extends over a buffer zone in x-direction and/or in y-direction of the user reference frame (x, y) ([0034] and [0096]- [0097] read on this element as such “…provision is made to define a neutral zone around the contact point detected in step a), the neutral zone being defined in such a manner that the independent stabilization system remains activated so long as the position of the current finger contact point remains within the neutral zone….Furthermore, a piloting command trigger threshold may be provided, so that commands are generated only beyond some minimum spacing between the movable icon and the stationary icon, which amounts to defining a neutral zone around the stationary icon 74.”).
Claim 8. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches the method according to claim 7 and Seydoux further teaches, wherein the buffer zone for the user command on a ±x-axis of the user reference frame is: 0.005 cm ≤ |x1| ≤0.5 cm, for the user command on a ±y-axis of the user reference frame is: 0.005 cm ≤ |1| ≤0.5 cm ([0075] describes a scenario that reads on this element “Finger contact on any point of the zone 68 while the appliance is in autopilot mode will more precisely give rise to the following actions: [0076] measuring data from the tilt sensors of the appliance, in order to determine its angle of tilt (the positions of the pitching and roll axes 32 and 34 relative to the absolute vertical in a terrestrial frame of reference) at the moment the finger makes contact, with this position then being defined as the new neutral position for subsequent application of commands by tilting; [0077] deactivating the autopilot and activating reactive mode (with provision fora "neutral zone" to be defined around the contact point, as described below); [0078] displaying the icon 70 under the user's finger, thereby confirming that the above actions have been properly executed; and [0079] making available under the user's finger up/down and pivot left/right commands in a manner….”).
Claim 9. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches the method according to claim 1 and Seydoux further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the sensitivity of the user reference frame (x, y) is adaptable such that the user command on the ±x-axis is 10 times more sensitive than the user command on a ±y-axis, in particular wherein the user command on a ±x-axis is 2 times more sensitive than the user command of the ±y-axis ([0075] describes a scenario that reads on this element “Finger contact on any point of the zone 68 while the appliance is in autopilot mode will more precisely give rise to the following actions: [0076] measuring data from the tilt sensors of the appliance, in order to determine its angle of tilt (the positions of the pitching and roll axes 32 and 34 relative to the absolute vertical in a terrestrial frame of reference) at the moment the finger makes contact, with this position then being defined as the new neutral position for subsequent application of commands by tilting; [0077] deactivating the autopilot and activating reactive mode (with provision fora "neutral zone" to be defined around the contact point, as described below); [0078] displaying the icon 70 under the user's finger, thereby confirming that the above actions have been properly executed; and [0079] making available under the user's finger up/down and pivot left/right commands in a manner….”).
Claim 10. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches the method according to claim 1 and Seydoux further teaches, wherein a range of an absolute scale of the ±x-axis and/or the ±y-axis of the user reference frame (x, y) is adaptable in size ([0085] describes this element as such—“The appliance detects the current position of the movable icon 72 relative to the stationary icon 74 and determines the quadrant in which the center of the movable icon 72 is located relative to the center of the stationary icon 74 on the surface of the screen: north, south, east, or west (the term "north" quadrant thus means the quadrant corresponding to a direction of +-45.degree. relative to the vertical direction relative to the screen, and correspondingly for the other quadrants, mutatis mutandis). The appliance also evaluates the distance between the movable icon and the center of the stationary icon 74.”).
Claim 11. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches the method according to claim 1 and Lee further teaches, wherein the user reference frame (x, y) is invertible, such that the user command (x1, y1) is translated into the actuator command
t
→
with
v
=
-
f
1
y
1
a
n
d
w
=
-
f
2
x
1
([0062]-[0066]—“Still further, when the operator wiggles his/her finger on the gesture sensing feature (203) while said mouse body (202) is being moved over the tinted reference surface (205T), said 3D navigational device (202) is able to provide the absolute address (x, y, z), translational motion vector (T), the tilting motion vector, which can be deemed as a first kind of “rotational” motion vector ( e.g. change of the normal vector n). In addition to the first kind of rotational motion vector, the presently disclosed 3D navigational device (202) is able to provide a spinning motion vector; such a spinning motion vector can
be deemed as a second kind of rotational motion vector.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Lee with the teaching of Seydoux because such combination would provide an enhanced user-engaging experience while enabling a user to manipulate the motion of an object (See Abstract of Lee).
Claim 12. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches the method according to claim 1 and Seydoux further teaches, wherein the touch sensitive surface (10) comprises a pre-defined area to set the new point of origin (2) (Taken together the following cited section reads on this element: [0063] The commands c) and d) are the results of actions applied by the user's finger 20 making contact with specific corresponding zones on the touch screen 18. [0067] The screen also displays a symbol 44 for activating reactive mode. A single press on this symbol 44 causes the drone to switch immediately to reactive mode. Releasing the symbol causes the drone to switch to autopilot mode with stabilization at the fixed point that was reached in the absence of any command, which fixed point is then kept stationary by the stabilization system incorporated in the drone.).
Claim 13. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches the method according to claim 1 and Seydoux further teaches, wherein switching between alternative method steps is done by touching the touch sensitive surface (10) twice and staying in touch with the touch sensitive surface (10) at the second touch to switch method steps, and/or releasing the touch to the touch sensitive surface (10) to return to the previous method step ([0067]—teaches switching between two mode).
Claim 14. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches method according to claim 1 and Seydoux further teaches, wherein the touch sensitive surface (10) is a touch screen and wherein the background colour of the touch screen (10) and/or user reference frame (x, y) changes according to the respective method step, to indicate haptic feedback of the respective method step ([0096] and [0124] reads on this element as such—“If such a situation is detected, the appliance briefly activates an alarm, e.g. a vibrator, to inform the user that the finger is badly placed. The piloting software is nevertheless activated in order to respond to commands appropriately in spite of the limitations that result from the position of the finger….In order to reassure a user who cannot see either hand, the position of the finger relative to the control surface is displayed on the screen of the glasses, thereby improving feedback from the appliance, and the user knows exactly what is being commanded (the movable and stationary icons are displayed in the same manner as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5), thereby giving an impression of piloting of the "head-up display" type.”).
Claim 16. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches controller (1) according to claim 15 and Seydoux further teaches, wherein the controller is integrated into a tablet application, a smartphone application and/or a pc application ([0056] reads on this element as such— “In particular, the appliance 16 may be a multimedia appliance or a personal digital assistant, for example a cell phone of the iPhone type or a multimedia player of the iPod Touch type (trademarks registered by Apple Inc., USA), which are appliances that incorporate various control members needed for detecting piloting commands and for exchanging data with the drone over a WiFi type wireless connection.”).
Claim 18. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches use of the controller according to claim 15 and Seydoux further teaches, with solely one finger or solely one input device ([0074] reads on this element as such—“…the user puts a finger on any point of a zone 68 of the screen…”).
Claim 19. Seydoux in view of Lee teaches use of the controller according to claim 18 and Lee further teaches, wherein a colour change provides visual feedback about the present method step ([0110] teaches a scenario that read on this element as such—“ When an operator moves the mouse body (202) on this tri-color reference surface (205T), the color index data (e.g. CIE 1931 RGB, etc.) measured by its color image sensor (214) serves as an ideal source of data for providing a 3D absolute address for the presently disclosed 3D GUI ( e.g. X, Y, and Z) at unprecedented resolution and sensitivity.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Lee with the teaching of Seydoux because such combination would provide an enhanced user-engaging experience while enabling a user to manipulate the motion of an object (See Abstract of Lee).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
T. Zafar, M. U. Khan, A. Nawaz and K. F. Ahmad, “Smart phone interface for robust control of mobile robots,” 2014 IEEE International Conference on Autonomous Robot Systems and Competitions (ICARSC), Espinho, Portugal, 2014, pp. 42-46. This reference teaches the development of a generic system for control of mobile robots using smart phones, and development of applications for two iPhones to get surveillance video from a mobile robot is illustrated.
Nádvorník, Jan, and Pavel Smutný. “Remote control robot using Android mobile device.” Proceedings of the 2014 15th International Carpathian Control Conference (ICCC). IEEE, 2014. This reference describes the design and realization of the mobile application for the Android operating system which is focused on manual control of mobile robot using wireless Bluetooth technology.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANA D THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-8549. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 - 5.
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, Ramya Burgess can be reached at 571-272-6011. 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.
/A.D.T/Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/RUSSELL FREJD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights