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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-14, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rodoni (US 9,829,892 B1).
Consider claim 1. Rodoni teaches a refuse collection system (see figs. 3 and 4) comprising: a deployable refuse collection vehicle (32) configured to deploy from a refuse vehicle (12), the deployable refuse collection vehicle including: a chassis (chassis of 36); a drive system (36, 38) coupled to the chassis; one or more sensors (44) configured to acquire data to facilitate detecting a refuse can; and a grip apparatus (arm of 32 which grips 16, see fig. 4) configured to engage the refuse can; and a control system (40). Rodoni’s control system is capable of performing the recited functional language: detecting the refuse can based on the data; controlling the drive system to navigate the deployable refuse collection vehicle to the refuse can; and controlling the grip apparatus to engage with the refuse can (see column 4, lines 12-30). Please see MPEP 2114 regarding functional limitations in apparatus claims.
Consider claim 2. Rodoni teaches that the refuse vehicle has a deployable vehicle dock (at right side of 12 in figs. 3 and 4) configured to receive and store the deployable refuse collection vehicle.
Consider claim 4. Rodoni’s control system is capable of performing the recited functional language: determining a staging location for the refuse can; and controlling the drive system to move the refuse can to the staging location (see column 4, lines 12-30). Please see MPEP 2114 regarding functional limitations in apparatus claims.
Consider claim 5. Rodoni teaches that the deployable refuse collection vehicle includes a refuse container (16) coupled to the chassis (see fig. 4).
Consider claim 6. Rodoni teaches that the grip apparatus is coupled to the refuse container (see fig. 4).
Consider claim 7. Rodoni teaches that the refuse container is a carry can that is detachable from the chassis and attachable to a lift assembly (24) of the refuse vehicle (see column 4, lines 26-30).
Consider claim 8. Rodoni teaches that the grip apparatus is configured to lift the refuse can and empty contents therein into the refuse container (see fig. 4 and column 4, lines 24-26).
Consider claim 9. Rodoni teaches that the one or more sensors include at least one of a camera, a LIDAR sensor, or a radar sensor (see column 4, lines 17-18).
Consider claim 10. Rodoni teaches that the deployable refuse collection vehicle is remotely operable (see column 4, lines 9-21).
Consider claim 11. Rodoni teaches that the deployable refuse collection vehicle is autonomous or semi-autonomous (see column 4, lines 9-21).
Consider claim 12. Rodoni teaches that the control system includes at least one of a first processing circuit located on the deployable refuse collection vehicle or a second processing circuit remote from the deployable refuse collection vehicle (40; see column 4, lines 12-21).
Consider claim 13. Rodoni teaches a refuse collection system (see figs. 3 and 4) comprising: a refuse collection robot (32) including: a drive system (36, 38); a sensor (44) configured to acquire data to facilitate detecting a refuse can; and a grabber (arm of 32 which grips 16, see fig. 4) configured to engage the refuse can; and a control system (40). Rodoni’s control system is capable of performing the recited functional language: detecting the refuse can based on the data; controlling the drive system to navigate the refuse collection robot to the refuse can; and controlling the grabber to engage with the refuse can (see column 4, lines 12-30). Please see MPEP 2114 regarding functional limitations in apparatus claims.
Consider claim 14. Rodoni teaches a refuse vehicle (12) having a deployable vehicle dock (at right side of 12 in figs. 3 and 4) configured to receive and store the refuse collection robot.
Consider claim 16. Rodoni’s control system is capable of performing the recited functional language: determining a staging location for the refuse can; and controlling the drive system to move the refuse can to the staging location (see column 4, lines 12-30). Please see MPEP 2114 regarding functional limitations in apparatus claims.
Consider claim 17. Rodoni teaches that the refuse collection robot includes a refuse container (16, see fig. 4).
Consider claim 18. Rodoni teaches that the grabber is coupled to the refuse container, and wherein the grabber is configured to lift the refuse can and empty contents therein into the refuse container (see fig. 4 and column 4, lines 24-26).
Consider claim 19. Rodoni teaches that the refuse container is a carry can that is detachable from refuse collection robot and attachable to a lift assembly (24) of the refuse vehicle (see column 4, lines 26-30).
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 3, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rodoni (US 9,829,892 B1) in view of Dumitras (US 10,481,607 B2).
Consider claim 3. Rodoni teaches that the deployable refuse collection vehicle includes a battery (38), but does not explicitly teach that the deployable vehicle dock is configured to facilitate charging the battery. Dumitras teaches a dock (142a) configured to facilitate charging the battery of a deployable refuse collection vehicle (see fig. 5). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Rodoni’s deployable vehicle dock to facilitate charging the battery of the deployable refuse collection vehicle as taught by Dumitras in order to extend the amount of time that the deployable refuse collection vehicle can be used and to reduce battery waste.
Consider claim 15. Rodoni teaches that the refuse collection robot includes a battery (38), but does not explicitly teach that the deployable vehicle dock is configured to facilitate charging the battery. Dumitras teaches a dock (142a) configured to facilitate charging the battery of a refuse collection robot (see fig. 5). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Rodoni’s deployable vehicle dock to facilitate charging the battery of the refuse collection robot as taught by Dumitras in order to extend the amount of time that the refuse collection robot can be used and to reduce battery waste.
Consider claim 20. Rodoni teaches a refuse collection system (see figs. 3 and 4) comprising: a front-loading refuse collection vehicle (12) having a lift assembly (24) and a dock (at right side of 12 in figs. 3 and 4); a carry can (16) detachably coupled to the lift assembly, the carry can including a grabber mechanism (portion of 16 engaged by 24 or by 32, see fig. 4); and a deployable robot (32) selectively coupled to the dock, the deployable robot having a battery (38); wherein the deployable robot is configured to engage with the carry can when the carry can is detached from the lift assembly such that the carry can is movable by the deployable robot (see fig. 4).
Rodoni does not explicitly teach that the battery of the deployable robot is chargeable at the dock. Dumitras teaches a dock (142a) configured to facilitate charging the battery of a deployable robot (see fig. 5). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Rodoni’s dock to facilitate charging the battery of the deployable robot as taught by Dumitras in order to extend the amount of time that the deployable robot can be used and to reduce battery waste.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The attached PTO-892 lists references which teach various automated refuse collection systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D SNELTING whose telephone number is (571)270-7015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00-4:30 EST.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571)272-7097. 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.
/JONATHAN SNELTING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights