DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action in response to U.S. application 18/898,757. All claims are pending.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1, 6-11, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sakakibara (US 20210141388).
Regarding claim 1, Sakakibara teaches a method for navigating a self-driving vehicle comprising a vehicle processor in communication with at least one vehicle sensor ([0063] discusses the control unit of the autonomous travel device in communication with the sensors of the travel device), the method comprising operating the vehicle processor to:
control the vehicle, using input data from the at least one vehicle sensor, to follow guiding infrastructure ([0041]-[0043] discuss using input data from the vehicle sensor to control the vehicle based on the detected line (guiding infrastructure));
detect, using the at least one vehicle sensor, a proximity indicator indicating proximity of the vehicle to a waypoint ([0057]-[0058] discuss detecting a marker with the detection sensor where the marker indicates proximity of the travel device to a line 1 where the point along the trajectory at line 1 is interpreted as a waypoint);
determine if a trigger condition is satisfied for responding to the detected proximity indicator ([0058] discusses the autonomous travel device communicating with the RFID marker with [0059] discussing this communication including obtaining operation control information related to the waypoint);
in response to determining the trigger condition is satisfied, assess a feature of the proximity indicator to determine a distance between a current position of the vehicle and the waypoint ([0084] discusses the RFID marker being a predetermined distance away from the line waypoint where when the sensor detects the presence of the RFID marker it determines the distance between the current position of the vehicle and the line waypoint); and
adjust at least one vehicle operating attribute based on the determined distance ([0059] discusses the marker providing operation control information including the required change in the vehicle operation at the waypoint where [0084] discusses this marker being a predetermined distance from the waypoint allowing the autonomous travel device to know at what point to perform the vehicle operation).
Regarding claim 6, Sakakibara teaches wherein the feature assessed is at least one of a signal strength or a signal frequency ([0057] discusses the marker as an RFID signal).
Regarding claim 7, Sakakibara teaches wherein the signal is at least one of a frequency signal or an optical light signal ([0057] discusses the marker as an RFID signal with [0058] discussing the autonomous device sensor communicating with the RFID marker).
Regarding claim 8, Sakakibara teaches wherein the trigger condition comprises determining that the waypoint corresponds to the location of a vehicle task requiring execution ([0058] discusses the autonomous travel device communicating with the RFID marker with [0059] discussing this communication including obtaining operation control information related to the waypoint).
Regarding claim 9, Sakakibara teaches wherein operating the vehicle processor to adjust the at least one vehicle attribute comprises operating the vehicle processor to control a vehicle drive system to reduce a vehicle travelling speed ([0044] discusses changing the predetermined operation including changing the speed of the travel device where it is interpreted that this would include reducing the travelling speed).
Regarding claim 10, Sakakibara teaches wherein the at least one vehicle sensor comprises a first vehicle sensor and a second vehicle sensor, the first vehicle sensor being used to follow the guiding infrastructure, and the second vehicle sensor being used to detect the proximity indicator ([0079] discusses the travel device including a first sensor to follow the line guiding infrastructure and a second sensor to detect markings).
Regarding claim 11, Sakakibara teaches a system for navigating a self-driving vehicle, the system comprising a vehicle processor in communication with at least one vehicle sensor ([0063] discusses the control unit of the autonomous travel device in communication with the sensors of the travel device), the vehicle processor being operable to:
control the vehicle, using input data from the at least one vehicle sensor, to follow guiding infrastructure ([0041]-[0043] discuss using input data from the vehicle sensor to control the vehicle based on the detected line (guiding infrastructure));
detect, using the at least one vehicle sensor, a proximity indicator indicating proximity of the vehicle to a waypoint ([0057]-[0058] discuss detecting a marker with the detection sensor where the marker indicates proximity of the travel device to a line 1 where the point along the trajectory at line 1 is interpreted as a waypoint);
determine if a trigger condition is satisfied for responding to the detected proximity indicator ([0058] discusses the autonomous travel device communicating with the RFID marker with [0059] discussing this communication including obtaining operation control information related to the waypoint);
in response to determining the trigger condition is satisfied, assess a feature of the proximity indicator to determine a distance between a current position of the vehicle and the waypoint ([0084] discusses the RFID marker being a predetermined distance away from the line waypoint where when the sensor detects the presence of the RFID marker it determines the distance between the current position of the vehicle and the line waypoint); and
adjust at least one vehicle attribute based on the determined distance ([0059] discusses the marker providing operation control information including the required change in the vehicle operation at the waypoint where [0084] discusses this marker being a predetermined distance from the waypoint allowing the autonomous travel device to know at what point to perform the vehicle operation).
Regarding claim 16, Sakakibara teaches wherein the feature assessed is at least one of a signal strength or a signal frequency ([0057] discusses the marker as an RFID signal).
Regarding claim 17, Sakakibara teaches wherein the signal is at least one of a frequency signal or an optical light signal ([0057] discusses the marker as an RFID signal with [0058] discussing the autonomous device sensor communicating with the RFID marker).
Regarding claim 18, Sakakibara teaches wherein the trigger condition comprises determining that the waypoint corresponds to the location of a vehicle task requiring execution ([0058] discusses the autonomous travel device communicating with the RFID marker with [0059] discussing this communication including obtaining operation control information related to the waypoint).
Regarding claim 19, Sakakibara teaches wherein the vehicle processor being operable to adjust the at least one vehicle attribute comprises the vehicle processor being operable to control a vehicle drive system to reduce a vehicle travelling speed ([0044] discusses changing the predetermined operation including changing the speed of the travel device where it is interpreted that this would include reducing the travelling speed).
Regarding claim 20, Sakakibara teaches wherein the at least one vehicle sensor comprises a first vehicle sensor and a second vehicle sensor, the first vehicle sensor being used to follow the guiding infrastructure, and the second vehicle sensor being used to detect the proximity indicator ([0079] discusses the travel device including a first sensor to follow the line guiding infrastructure and a second sensor to detect markings).
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 2-3, 5, 12-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakakibara in view of Lee (2013 “A Vision-Based Automated Guided Vehicle System with Marker Recognition for Indoor Use”).
Regarding claim 2, Sakakibara teaches wherein the proximity indicator comprises a line segment spaced from the guiding infrastructure.
Lee teaches wherein the proximity indicator comprises a line segment spaced from the guiding infrastructure (p. 10055 discusses the fiduciary marker as a triangle indicating direction where the triangle is interpreted as a converging line segment to indicate direction).
Sakakibara teaches using fiduciary markers to provide information to an autonomous travel device. Lee teaches fiduciary markers for an autonomous vehicle including images such as triangles to indicate direction. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Sakakibara with the fiduciary markers of Lee as Lee teaches that this allows the system to operate with a consumer-grade camera, making the system less expensive.
Regarding claim 3, Sakakibara teaches wherein the line segment is located proximal the waypoint and converges toward the guiding infrastructure toward the waypoint.
Lee teaches wherein the line segment is located proximal the waypoint and converges toward the guiding infrastructure toward the waypoint (p. 10055 discusses the fiduciary marker as a triangle indicating direction where the triangle is interpreted as a converging line segment to indicate direction).
Sakakibara teaches using fiduciary markers to provide information to an autonomous travel device. Lee teaches fiduciary markers for an autonomous vehicle including images such as triangles to indicate direction. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Sakakibara with the fiduciary markers of Lee as Lee teaches that this allows the system to operate with a consumer-grade camera, making the system less expensive.
Regarding claim 5, Sakakibara teaches wherein the feature of the proximity indicator comprises at least one of a thickness of the line segment or a color of the line segment.
Lee teaches wherein the feature of the proximity indicator comprises at least one of a thickness of the line segment or a color of the line segment (p. 10055 discusses the fiduciary marker as a specific color of triangle indicating direction where the triangle is interpreted as a converging line segment.
Sakakibara teaches using fiduciary markers to provide information to an autonomous travel device. Lee teaches fiduciary markers for an autonomous vehicle including images such as triangles to indicate direction. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Sakakibara with the fiduciary markers of Lee as Lee teaches that this allows the system to operate with a consumer-grade camera, making the system less expensive.
Regarding claim 12, Sakakibara teaches wherein the proximity indicator comprises a line segment spaced from the guiding infrastructure.
Lee teaches wherein the proximity indicator comprises a line segment spaced from the guiding infrastructure (p. 10055 discusses the fiduciary marker as a triangle indicating direction where the triangle is interpreted as a converging line segment to indicate direction).
Sakakibara teaches using fiduciary markers to provide information to an autonomous travel device. Lee teaches fiduciary markers for an autonomous vehicle including images such as triangles to indicate direction. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Sakakibara with the fiduciary markers of Lee as Lee teaches that this allows the system to operate with a consumer-grade camera, making the system less expensive.
Regarding claim 13, Sakakibara teaches wherein the line segment is located proximal the waypoint and converges toward the guiding infrastructure toward the waypoint.
Lee teaches wherein the line segment is located proximal the waypoint and converges toward the guiding infrastructure toward the waypoint (p. 10055 discusses the fiduciary marker as a triangle indicating direction where the triangle is interpreted as a converging line segment to indicate direction).
Sakakibara teaches using fiduciary markers to provide information to an autonomous travel device. Lee teaches fiduciary markers for an autonomous vehicle including images such as triangles to indicate direction. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Sakakibara with the fiduciary markers of Lee as Lee teaches that this allows the system to operate with a consumer-grade camera, making the system less expensive.
Regarding claim 15, Sakakibara teaches wherein the feature of the proximity indicator comprises at least one of a thickness of the line segment or a color of the line segment.
Lee teaches wherein the feature of the proximity indicator comprises at least one of a thickness of the line segment or a color of the line segment (p. 10055 discusses the fiduciary marker as a specific color of triangle indicating direction where the triangle is interpreted as a converging line segment.
Sakakibara teaches using fiduciary markers to provide information to an autonomous travel device. Lee teaches fiduciary markers for an autonomous vehicle including images such as triangles to indicate direction. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Sakakibara with the fiduciary markers of Lee as Lee teaches that this allows the system to operate with a consumer-grade camera, making the system less expensive.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 14 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Holz (US 20180307941) teaches localization of a vehicle based on distance between markers; Ghadiok (US 20180045519) teaches landmark parameters of a robotic system including the distance between landmarks; and Ponader (DE 19908493 A1) teaches orientation markers being used for localization of a robot.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE M JACKSON whose telephone number is (303)297-4364. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00-4:30 MT.
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, Abby Lin can be reached at (571) 270-3976. 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.
/D.M.J./ Examiner, Art Unit 3657 /ABBY LIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657