DETAILED ACTION
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 09/19/2024 and 03/05/2025.The submission 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 § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Saurez (NPL: “Development of a Dexterous Dual-Arm Omnidirectional Mobile Manipulator” from IDS) in view of Collette (US20240408355) and Furuta (US20050151496).
Regarding claim 1, Saurez teaches a multi-sectional robot, comprising:
a first robot configured to communicate via a first protocol (Fig. 7 disclosing the left hand communicates via a USB protocol);
a second robot coupled to the first robot and configured to communicate via a second protocol (Fig. 7 disclosing at least a second arm communicating via a second USB protocol and a drive unit communicating via ethernet protocol); and
a controller comprising a processing system and a memory, the memory encoded with instructions configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to (the onboard computer, central PC see last two paragraphs of section 2.2 and figures 7-8):
operate based on a third protocol (section 3.3 first paragraph disclosing a wireless protocol for the central PC);
receive one or more movement commands to move the multi-sectional robot (section 3.3 disclosing the instruction for the arms and wheels to follow a trajectory;
determine a status of the multi-sectional robot (section 3.3 disclosing the state of the robot);
determine an operational profile for the first robot and the second, wherein the operational profile comprises one or more robotic control operations (section 3.3 further disclosing acceleration or deceleration “operation profile” of all of the joints, i.e., including first and second robot, based on the state of the robot and path);
while Saurez does not explicitly disclose translate at least a first portion of the operational profile from the third protocol to a first translation in the first protocol; translate at least a second portion of the operational profile from the third protocol to a second translation in the second protocol; and output the first translation to the first robot as first operational instructions and transmit the second translation to the second robot as second operational instructions. Saurez teaches the data that controls all the actuators of all the robots in section 3.3, i.e., the first portion and the second portion for the first robot and second robot respectively, and hints the control of the robot via the OC wirelessly using the third protocol being wireless.
Collette teaches translate at least a first portion of the operational profile from the third protocol to a first translation in the first protocol translate at least a second portion of the operational profile from the third protocol to a second translation in the second protocol and output the first translation to the first robot as first operational instructions and transmit the second translation to the second robot as second operational instructions ([0145]-[0164] disclosing the conversion of the data including instructions such as movement speed from a first protocol to another [0147] specifically disclosing converting data received via remote protocol into a local protocol for the local BUS that can be interpreted by the catheter).
The combination of Collette with Suarez teaches the need to convert any instruction data into the interpretable format by the robot, the combination is obvious yielding predictable results ensuring the robot interprets the instruction thus improving the safety of robots.
Suarez as modified by Collette does not teach the operational profile being based on the one or more movement commands and the status.
Furuta teaches the operational profile being based on the one or more movement commands and the status (at least abstract disclosing the movement command is checked with the status of the robot to determine the trajectory if the command is within the range of stable moves, [0052]-[0060] disclosing based on a sitting state to determine further states being possible or not).
It would have been obvious to combine the teaching of Furuta with the teaching of Suarez as modified by Collette yielding predictable results in order to select only motion parameters that can be reached and cause stability of the robot based on current state of the robot as taught by Furuta.
Regarding claim 2, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta further teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to determine the operational profile by accessing data correlated to the one or more movement commands and the status within a coordination control library.
Specifically, Furuta teaches wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to determine the operational profile by accessing data correlated to the one or more movement commands and the status within a coordination control library (at least abstract disclosing the movement command is checked with the status of the robot to determine the trajectory if the command is within the range of stable moves, the stability control is interpreted as the coordinated control library).
It would have been obvious to combine the teaching of Furuta with the teaching of Suarez as modified by Collette yielding predictable results in order to select only motion parameters that can be reached and cause stability of the robot based on current state of the robot as taught by Furuta.
Regarding claim 4, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to determine the operational profile by performing a coordination control algorithm based on the one or more movement commands and the status.
Specifically, Furuta teaches wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to determine the operational profile by performing a coordination control algorithm based on the one or more movement commands and the status (at least abstract disclosing the movement command is checked with the status of the robot to determine the trajectory if the command is within the range of stable moves, the algorithm checking the movement stability is interpreted as coordinated control algorithm).
It would have been obvious to combine the teaching of Furuta with the teaching of Suarez as modified by Collette yielding predictable results in order to select only motion parameters that can be reached and cause stability of the robot based on current state of the robot as taught by Furuta.
Regarding claim 5, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta further teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to:
Specifically, Furuta teaches the filter the one or more movement commands based on the status to identify one or more filtered movement commands (at least the abstract disclosing filtering out the commands that will not cause stability); and
determine the operational profile by accessing data correlated to the one or more filtered movement commands (at least the abstract disclosing the control of the robot based on the filtered commands that cause instability).
It would have been obvious to combine the teaching of Furuta with the teaching of Suarez as modified by Collette yielding predictable results in order to select only motion parameters that can be reached and cause stability of the robot based on current state of the robot as taught by Furuta.
Regarding claim 6, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, wherein the first robot is configured to perform first mechanical actuations based on the first operational instructions and the second robot is configured to perform second mechanical actuations based on the second operational instructions (at least section 3.3 of Suarez disclosing the first and second operation instruction for each of the arms to move based on the trajectory).
Regarding claim 7, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to output the first translation to the first robot and output the second translation to the second robot simultaneously (Suarez section 3.3 discloses the parallel actuation of the robot simultaneous parts are actuated at the same time).
Furuta teaches the translation of the instruction to the robots ([0145]-[0164] disclosing the conversion of the data including instructions such as movement speed from a first protocol to another [0147] specifically disclosing converting data received via remote protocol into a local protocol for the local BUS that can be interpreted by the catheter).
thus combination of Collette with Suarez teaches the need to convert any instruction data into the interpretable format by the robot, the combination is obvious yielding predictable results ensuring the robot interprets the instruction simultaneously thus improving the safety of robots and enabling the control of both parts simultaneously.
Regarding claim 9, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to translate the one or more movement commands into the third protocol, wherein the one or more movement commands comprise one or more momentary movement commands or a stream of one or more continuous commands.
Specifically, Collette teaches wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to translate the one or more movement commands into the third protocol, wherein the one or more movement commands comprise one or more momentary movement commands or a stream of one or more continuous commands ([0145]-[0164] disclosing the conversion of the data including instructions such as movement speed from a first protocol to another [0147] specifically disclosing converting data received via remote protocol into a local protocol for the local BUS that can be interpreted by the catheter).
The combination of Collette with Suarez teaches the need to convert any instruction data into the interpretable format by the robot, the combination is obvious yielding predictable results ensuring the robot interprets the instruction thus improving the safety of robots. The third protocol could be any protocol and the method of Collette can be applied to a third protocol.
Regarding claim 10, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, wherein:
the one or more movement commands comprise gross motor robotic instructions for the multi-sectional robot (Suarez section 3.3 disclosing the trajectory which includes all the controls for all the parts, gross robotic instruction control for the multi sectional robot); and
the first operational instructions and the second operational instructions comprise specific actuations (Suarez 3.3 disclosing the actuation of each of the robotic joints for moving each arm).
Regarding claim 11, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, wherein the status of the first robot, the status of the second robot, or both, is defined by one or more sensors of the multi- sectional robot (at least abstract disclosing the movement command is checked with the status of the robot to determine the trajectory if the command is within the range of stable moves. [0038] disclosing the detector for both legs, i.e., equivalent to multiple robots).
It would have been obvious to combine the teaching of Furuta with the teaching of Suarez as modified by Collette yielding predictable results in order to select only motion parameters that can be reached and cause stability of the robot based on current state of the robot as taught by Furuta.
Regarding claim 13, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to output the status to the first robot and the second robot based on the one or more movement commands (section 3.3 Suarez teaches outputting states for the actuators to move the robots as part of the trajectory).
Regarding claim 15, Suarez teaches a method for operating a multi-sectional robot, comprising:
receiving, via a controller of a first robot, one or more movement commands in a first protocol (section 3.3 disclosing receiving instructions via a user input wirelessly, i.e., first protocol);
determining, via the controller of the first robot, a status of the multi-sectional robot (section 3.3 disclosing determining status of the robot);
determining, via the controller of the first robot, an operational profile for a second robot and a third robot wherein the operational profile comprises one or more robotic control operations (section 3.3 further disclosing acceleration or deceleration “operation profile” of all of the joints, i.e., including first and second robot, based on the state of the robot and path);
while Saurez does not explicitly disclose translating, via the controller of the first robot, at least a first portion of the operational profile from the first protocol to a first translation in a second protocol; translating, via the controller of the first robot, at least a second portion of the operational profile from the first protocol to a second translation in a third protocol; outputting, via the controller of the first robot, the first translation to the second robot as first operational instructions and outputting the second translation to the third robot as second operational instructions.. Saurez teaches the data that controls all the actuators of all the robots in section 3.3, i.e., the first portion and the second portion for the first robot and second robot respectively, and hints the control of the robot via the OC wirelessly using the third protocol being wireless.
Collette teaches translating, via the controller of the first robot, at least a first portion of the operational profile from the first protocol to a first translation in a second protocol, translating, via the controller of the first robot, at least a second portion of the operational profile from the first protocol to a second translation in a third protocol, outputting, via the controller of the first robot, the first translation to the second robot as first operational instructions and outputting the second translation to the third robot as second operational instructions ([0145]-[0164] disclosing the conversion of the data including instructions such as movement speed from a first protocol to another [0147] specifically disclosing converting data received via remote protocol into a local protocol for the local BUS that can be interpreted by the catheter).
The combination of Collette with Suarez teaches the need to convert any instruction data into the interpretable format by the robot, the combination is obvious yielding predictable results ensuring the robot interprets the instruction thus improving the safety of robots.
Suarez as modified by Collette does not teach the operational profile being based on the one or more movement commands and the status.
Furuta teaches the operational profile being based on the one or more movement commands and the status (at least abstract disclosing the movement command is checked with the status of the robot to determine the trajectory if the command is within the range of stable moves, [0052]-[0060] disclosing based on a sitting state to determine further states being possible or not).
It would have been obvious to combine the teaching of Furuta with the teaching of Suarez as modified by Collette yielding predictable results in order to select only motion parameters that can be reached and cause stability of the robot based on current state of the robot as taught by Furuta.
Regarding claim 16, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the method of claim 15, comprising: accessing, via the controller of the first robot, a coordination control library; retrieving, via the controller of the first robot, data correlated to the one or more movement commands and the status from the coordination control library.
Furuta teaches accessing, via the controller of the first robot, a coordination control library; retrieving, via the controller of the first robot, data correlated to the one or more movement commands and the status from the coordination control library (at least abstract disclosing the movement command is checked with the status of the robot to determine the trajectory if the command is within the range of stable moves, the stability control is interpreted as the coordinated control library).
It would have been obvious to combine the teaching of Furuta with the teaching of Suarez as modified by Collette yielding predictable results in order to select only motion parameters that can be reached and cause stability of the robot based on current state of the robot as taught by Furuta.
Regarding claim 17, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furata teaches method of claim 15, comprising: applying, via the controller of the first robot, one or more mathematical operators to the one or more movement commands to obtain a result (section 3.3 Suarez disclosing mathematical calculations of path); and determining, via the controller of the first robot, the operational profile for the second robot and the third robot based on the result (section 3.3 further disclosing the trajectory to control all parts of the robot based on the mathematical operators)
Regarding claim 18, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the controller of the first robot outputs the first translation to the second robot and the second translation to the third robot via a network protocol (Collette as disclosed in claim 1 rejection disclosing the output via a network protocol translation, ([0145]-[0164] disclosing the conversion of the data including instructions such as movement speed from a first protocol to another [0147] specifically disclosing converting data received via remote protocol into a local protocol for the local BUS that can be interpreted by the catheter).
The combination of Collette with Suarez teaches the need to convert any instruction data into the interpretable format by the robot, the combination is obvious yielding predictable results ensuring the robot interprets the instruction thus improving the safety of robots.
Claims 3, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Saurez (NPL: “Development of a Dexterous Dual-Arm Omnidirectional Mobile Manipulator”) in view of Collette (US20240408355) and Furuta (US20050151496) and Oleynik (US20190291277).
Regarding claim 3, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta multi-sectional robot of claim 2, but does not teach wherein the coordination control library comprises a set of rules defining robotic control operations for the first robot and the second robot that can be used together in the operational profile based on the status.
Oleynik teaches wherein the coordination control library comprises a set of rules defining robotic control operations for the first robot and the second robot that can be used together in the operational profile based on the status (see at least [0718]-[0721] disclosing Mini manipulations which are coordinated movements of both hands based on the current status of the robot).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teaching of Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta to incorporate the teaching of Oleynik of wherein the coordination control library comprises a set of rules defining robotic control operations for the first robot and the second robot that can be used together in the operational profile based on the status in order to coordinate movements of robotic arms in parallel and in series using library of mini manipulations which improves the control of robot and reduce load on the computing system and improve control of multi limb robots in a coordinated matter, the combination is obvious yielding predictable results.
Regarding claim 8, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to output the first translation to the first robot and output the second translation to the second robot (Collette teaches the translation of the first and second commands to the robot ).
Oleynik teaches according to a sequence ([0718] disclosing the sequence of moving arms in series).
It would be obvious to substitute the sequence of movements of Oleynik to control the robot of Suarez yielding predictable results and improving coordination between the fingers and hands based on mini manipulations as taught by Oleynik, applying the translation to each command separately in a sequence control is obvious to reduce computation load on the robot.
.
Claims 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Saurez (NPL: “Development of a Dexterous Dual-Arm Omnidirectional Mobile Manipulator”) in view of Collette (US20240408355) and Furuta (US20050151496) and Kim (US20250026508).
Regarding claim 12, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, comprising a machine vision system configured to acquire image data of the first robot, the second robot, or both, wherein the status of the first robot, the second robot or both is defined at least in part by the image data.
Kim teaches comprising a machine vision system configured to acquire image data of the first robot, the second robot, or both, wherein the status of the first robot, the second robot or both is defined at least in part by the image data ([0032]-[0038] disclosing determining current state of a robot based on the camera image).
The combination of Kim with Suarez as modified by Collette and Furata is obvious, yielding predictable results in order to determine a position and positional relationship with objects based on the images as taught by kim.
Claims 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Saurez (NPL: “Development of a Dexterous Dual-Arm Omnidirectional Mobile Manipulator”) in view of Collette (US20240408355) and Furuta (US20050151496) and Rosenberg (US11351680).
Regarding claim 14, Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 1, wherein the first robot and the second robot comprise actuators, audio output devices, and visual output devices configured to be controlled by the first operational instructions and the second operational instructions, respectively.
Ichien teaches wherein the first robot and the second robot comprise actuators, audio output devices, and visual output devices configured to be controlled by the first operational instructions and the second operational instructions, respectively (col. 102 disclosing simulating a facial and sound expressions via instructions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine/substitute the visual and audio instructions of Ichien yielding predictable results in order to simulate and improve human like robots.
Claims 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Saurez (NPL: “Development of a Dexterous Dual-Arm Omnidirectional Mobile Manipulator”) in view of Collette (US20240408355) and Oleynik (US20190291277).
Regarding claim 19, Suarez teaches a multi-sectional robot, comprising:
a first robot configured to communicate via a first protocol (Fig. 7 disclosing the left hand communicates via a USB protocol);
a second robot coupled to the first robot and configured to communicate via a second protocol (Fig. 7 disclosing at least a second arm communicating via a second USB protocol and a drive unit communicating via ethernet protocol); and
a controller comprising a processing system and a memory, the memory encoded with instructions configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to (the onboard computer, central PC see last two paragraphs of section 2.2 and figures 7-8):
output operational profile to the second robot as operational instructions (section 3.3 disclosing the instructions to operate the robots).
Collette teaches receive positional data from the first robot in the first protocol, translate the positional data into translated positional data in a third protocol ([0145]-[0164] disclosing the conversion of the data including instructions such as movement speed from a first protocol to another [0147] specifically disclosing converting data received via remote protocol into a local protocol for the local BUS that can be interpreted by the catheter. [0145]-[0164] further disclosing receiving a position data from a robot and translating the information into the protocol of the long distance).
determine an operational profile for the second robot based on the translated positional data and a coordination control algorithm or based on the translated positional data and a coordination control library, wherein the operational profile includes or is indicative of one or more robotic control operations ([0145]-[0164] disclosing determining the control of the robot based on the translated data and algorithm);
translate at least a portion of the operational profile from the third protocol to a translated operational profile in the second protocol ([0145]-[0164] disclosing the translation of the instructions to the robots protocol);
and output the translated operational profile to the second robot as operational instructions ([0145]-[0164] controlling the second robot as the translated instructions).
The combination of Collette with Suarez teaches the need to convert any instruction data into the interpretable format by the robot, the combination is obvious yielding predictable results ensuring the robot interprets the instruction thus improving the safety of robots.
While the translated position data used in Collette refers to translated position data of the same robot.
Oleynik teaches the operation profile of both hands based on their current positions (see at least [0718]-[0721] disclosing Mini manipulations which are coordinated movements of both hands based on the current status of the robot).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teaching of Suarez as modified by Collette and Furuta to incorporate the teaching of Oleynik of wherein the coordination control library comprises a set of rules defining robotic control operations for the first robot and the second robot that can be used together in the operational profile based on the status in order to coordinate movements of robotic arms in parallel and in series using library of mini manipulations which improves the control of robot and reduce load on the computing system and improve control of multi limb robots in a coordinated matter, the combination is obvious yielding predictable results.
Regarding claim 20, Suarez as modified by Collette and Oleynik teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 19, wherein the operational instructions comprise instructions to activate an actuator, rotate a rotor, move along a primary motion platform, move along a secondary motion platform, adjust a visual output device, adjust an audio output device, adjust a gesture output device, or any combination thereof (section 3.3 Suarez teaches actuating motors).
Regarding claim 21, Suarez as modified by Collette and Oleynik teaches the multi-sectional robot of claim 19, wherein the instructions are configured to be executed by the processing system to cause the controller to: receive feedback indicative of a movement of the multi-sectional robot; and adjust the operational profile in response to determining the multi-sectional robot partially performed the movement.
Specifically, Collette teaches receive feedback indicative of a movement of the multi-sectional robot; and adjust the operational profile in response to determining the multi-sectional robot partially performed the movement ([0145]-[0164] disclosing monitoring the position at each data frame to confirm the position of the catheter and adjusting the profile accordingly).
The combination of Collette improves safety and is obvious yielding predictable results avoiding errors from propagating and avoiding injuries.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant's disclosure. The prior art cited in PTO-892 and not mentioned above disclose related devices and methods.
US20240181647 disclosing a broad instruction converted to specific actions to each robot part.
US20210213604 disclosing a modular robot that can add a speaker and screen instead of other modules.
US20240066683 disclosing a modular robot sensing positions of each other part.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMAD O EL SAYAH whose telephone number is (571)270-7734. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 6:30-4:30.
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, Ramon Mercado can be reached on (571) 270-5744. 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.uspto.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 a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMAD O EL SAYAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658B