Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/887,375

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR POSITIONING SENSORS WITHIN A WORKSPACE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Sep 17, 2024
Examiner
WALLACE, ZACHARY JOSEPH
Art Unit
3656
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Ford Global Technologies LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
130 granted / 180 resolved
+20.2% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
193
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.2%
-28.8% vs TC avg
§103
42.6%
+2.6% vs TC avg
§102
29.1%
-10.9% vs TC avg
§112
13.5%
-26.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 180 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,090,665 Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following: Claim 1 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 1 of US Application 18/887,375 generating a workspace model having one or more digital robots, one or more digital systems, and a digital transport system, wherein the workspace model is a digital model of the workspace, the one or more digital robots are digital models of the one or more robots, and the one or more digital sensors are digital models of the one or more sensors; simulating, for a task of the one or more digital robots, a sensor operation of the one or more digital sensors within the workspace model… generating a depth map based on the simulation of the sensor operation and each of the one or more digital robots, the one or more digital sensors… identifying, an undetectable area within the workspace model based on the simulated sensor operation and the generation of the depth map… selectively positioning, based on an aggregate ratio being greater than a threshold aggregate ratio and a coverage ratio associated with each of the undetectable areas being less than a threshold coverage ratio, a set of sensors from among the one or more sensors based on the undetectable areas associated with the task. generating a workspace model based on a virtual representation of a physical workspace, the workspace model including one or more digital robots and one or more digital sensors; simulating, for a task of the one or more digital robots, a sensor operation of the one or more digital sensors within the workspace model; generating a depth map in response to the simulation of the sensor operation, each of the one or more digital robots, and the one or more digital sensors; identifying, an undetectable area within the workspace model based on the simulated sensor operation and the generation of the depth map; and selectively positioning a set of sensors from among the one or more sensors based on the undetectable areas associated with the task. Claim 2 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 2 of US Application 18/887,375 selectively positioning the set of sensors further comprises moving the set of sensors along the transport system selectively positioning the set of sensors further comprises moving the set of sensors along a digital transport system, wherein the workspace model further includes the transport system Claim 3 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 3 of US Application 18/887,375 selectively positioning the set of sensors further comprises rotating the set of sensors selectively positioning the set of sensors further comprises rotating the set of sensors Claim 4 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 4 of US Application 18/887,375 the workspace further comprises one or more actuators attached to the set of sensors; and the one or more actuators are configured to rotate the set of sensors the workspace model further includes one or more actuators attached to the set of sensors, and wherein the one or more actuators are configured to rotate the set of sensors Claim 5 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 5 of US Application 18/887,375 determining the aggregate undetectable area based on the undetectable areas associated with the task determining an aggregate undetectable area based on the undetectable areas associated with the task Claim 8 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 6 of US Application 18/887,375 the set of sensors are selectively positioned such that the undetectable area corresponds to the Pareto optimal state selectively positioning the set of sensors in response to the aggregate undetectable area not satisfying a detection metric Claim 7 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 7 of US Application 18/887,375 determining whether the aggregate undetectable area corresponds to a pareto optimal state determining whether the aggregate undetectable area corresponds to a pareto optimal state Claim 8 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 8 of US Application 18/887,375 the set of sensors are selectively positioned such that the undetectable area corresponds to the Pareto optimal state the undetectable area corresponds to the pareto optimal state based on the selective positioning of the set of sensors Claim 9 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 9 of US Application 18/887,375 the undetectable area within the workspace model is identified based on a plurality of voxels representing the workspace model the undetectable area within the workspace model is identified based on a plurality of voxels representing the workspace model Claim 10 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 10 of US Application 18/887,375 the undetectable area within the workspace model is determined based on one or more values of the depth map, and wherein each of the one or more values of the depth map is associated with one of the plurality of voxels the undetectable area within the workspace model is determined based on one or more values of the depth map, and wherein each of the one or more values of the depth map is associated with one of the plurality of voxels Claim 11 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 11 of US Application 18/887,375 the undetectable area within the workspace model is determined in response to the one or more values of the depth map being less thana threshold depth value the undetectable area within the workspace model is determined in response to the one or more values of the depth map being less than a threshold depth value Claim 12 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 12 of US Application 18/887,375 determining the aggregate undetectable area based on the undetectable areas associated with the task; and determining whether the aggregate undetectable area satisfies a detection metric based on a multi-objective optimization routine, wherein the set of sensors are selectively positioned along the transport system in response to the aggregate undetectable area not satisfying the detection metric. determining an aggregate undetectable area based on the undetectable areas associated with the task; and determining whether the aggregate undetectable area satisfies a detection metric based on a multi-objective optimization routine, wherein the set of sensors are selectively positioned along a digital transport system of the workspace model in response to the aggregate undetectable area not satisfying the detection metric. Claim 13 of USP 12,090,665 Claim 13 of US Application 18/887,375 the transport system is configured to move the set of sensors in a two-dimensional space of the workspace, a three-dimensional space of the workspace, or a combination thereof the digital transport system is configured to move the set of sensors in a two-dimensional space of the workspace model, a three-dimensional space of the workspace model, or a combination thereof Claims 14-20 discloses analogous limitations to claim 1-13 and are therefore also rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,090,665. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chong et al. (US 2020/0193686) – discloses techniques for determining optimal sensor configuration by generating a virtual model operating within an environment. However Chong fails to explicitly disclose “simulating, for a task of the one or more digital robots, a sensor operation of the one or more digital sensors within the workspace model” and “identifying, an undetectable area within the workspace model based on the simulated sensor operation and the generation of the depth map; and selectively positioning a set of sensors from among the one or more sensors based on the undetectable areas associated with the task”. Boca et al. (US 2020/0201268) – discloses a robotic system configured to analyze sensor data and generate and update a prediction model associated with a virtual scene in the workspace including determining data from the virtual sensor which have detected one or more areas blocked by an object within the simulated environment. However Boca fails to explicitly disclose “identifying, an undetectable area within the workspace model based on the simulated sensor operation and the generation of the depth map; and selectively positioning a set of sensors from among the one or more sensors based on the undetectable areas associated with the task”. DeVore et al. (US 2021/0097147) – discloses a method for generating a simulated sensor based on placement and orientation of the virtual sensor within the virtual environment. Simulating the sensor outputs may result in detection of a field of view blocking the sensor, or a blind spot. However DeVore fails to explicitly disclose “simulating, for a task of the one or more digital robots, a sensor operation of the one or more digital sensors within the workspace model” and “identifying, an undetectable area within the workspace model based on the simulated sensor operation and the generation of the depth map; and selectively positioning a set of sensors from among the one or more sensors based on the undetectable areas associated with the task”. Lam et al. (US 2023/0342967) – discloses optimization of a robotic operational environment to reduce the occlusion of one or more sensors. However Lam does not explicitly disclose “identifying, an undetectable area within the workspace model based on the simulated sensor operation and the generation of the depth map; and selectively positioning a set of sensors from among the one or more sensors based on the undetectable areas associated with the task”. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY JOSEPH WALLACE whose telephone number is (469)295-9087. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday. 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. /Z.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3656 /WADE MILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 17, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600038
MOTION CONTROL METHOD AND ROBOT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602029
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR TASK PLANNING FOR VISUAL ROOM REARRANGEMENT UNDER PARTIAL OBSERVABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589496
TRAJECTORY GENERATION SYSTEM, TRAJECTORY GENERATION METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583465
METHOD FOR REDUNDANT MONITORING OF DRIVING FUNCTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576882
Method and Device for Prioritizing Route Incidents
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+20.0%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 180 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month