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 .
Response to Arguments
After applicant’s amendments filed on 05/04/2026, the claim objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, and 3-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the reference applied in the prior rejection of record for matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shitamoto (US 20130116880 A1) in view of Tanigawa (US 20150234383 A1) in further view of Ueda( US 20140148989 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shitamoto teaches a control system that controls a mobile object which is capable of autonomously moving in an area(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction) in which a pedestrian is able to move(Shitamoto, paragraph 70, The path planning unit 26 uses the size of the autonomous mobile body and the environmental map to extract a path that the autonomous mobile body can move without interfering with the known obstacles on the environmental map…The path is also set in the region whether people and other autonomous mobile bodies move), comprising:
a storage medium configured to store computer-readable instructions(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, a ROM storing programs ); and one or more processors connected to the storage medium(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, a ROM storing programs and the like to cause the microprocessor to perform the various types of processing ),
wherein the one or more processors execute the computer-readable instructions(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, The electronic control device 20 preferably includes a microprocessor which performs calculations, a ROM storing programs and the like to cause the microprocessor to perform the various types of processing) to:
detect objects around the mobile object(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, an obstacle information acquisition unit arranged to acquire obstacle information of obstacles around the autonomous mobile body, an obstacle identification unit arranged to identify, based on the obstacle information acquired by the obstacle information acquisition unit, positions of both ends of a region in which an obstacle positioned in a moving target direction exists. Shitamoto, paragraph 55, upon moving along the planned path, detects the as-yet-unknown obstacles that it will encounter by using various types of obstacle sensors),
recognize a traffic participant that is estimated to pass by the mobile object included in the object(According to the specification, a traffic participant can be a pedestrian or a vehicle. Similarly, Shitamoto discloses its obstacle can include a person. Shitamoto further discloses determining if the obstacle will interfere with its autonomous mobile body. Shitamoto, paragraph 55, upon moving along the planned path, detects the as-yet-unknown obstacles that it will encounter by using various types of obstacle sensors. Shitamoto, paragraph 141, the interference determination unit 31 determines that the autonomous mobile body will interfere with the interfering obstacle 66, unless it stops. Shitamoto, paragraph 86,the as-yet-unknown obstacle includes moving objects such as people ) and a stop position to which the mobile object is able to be evacuated on the basis of a result of the detection of the object (Shitamoto discloses using map and pull-off direction to set a stop position where the autonomous mobile body pulls off to let an obstacle pass. Shitamoto, paragraph 9, a stop position setting unit arranged to set a stop position in the pull-off direction based on the pull-off direction set by the direction setting unit, and an environmental map. Shitamoto, paragraph 6, an autonomous mobile body capable of moving by autonomously setting a pull-off direction so that a movable obstacle can pass through safely ).
While Shitamoto teaches about detecting obstacles and stopping a moving object when recognizing an impending interference with a traffic participant, it fails to disclose a system to stop the mobile object at a stop position so that the mobile object is included in a visual field range of the traffic participant when the traffic participant and the mobile object are estimated to pass by each other, and determine, when there are a plurality of traffic participants and a plurality of stop position candidates, a stop position candidate in which a mobile object is included in a visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants among the plurality of stop position candidates as a stop position, and stop the mobile object at the stop position, wherein each of the stop position candidates is a stop position candidate at which the mobile object stops before the plurality of traffic participants and the mobile object pass each other.
However, Tanigawa, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about a movement information calculator for moving person discloses a system to stop the mobile object at a stop position so that the mobile object is included in a visual field range of the traffic participant when the traffic participant and the mobile object are estimated to pass by each other, and (Tanigawa discloses an autonomous running apparatus that moves to a gaze region of a person on a wheelchair while avoiding interfering with the wheelchair’s path. Tanigawa, paragraph 313, in a case of an unskilled wheelchair patient (wheelchair beginner), a large weight is put on an arc entering the gaze region. As a result, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by even if the running distance greatly increases. Tanigawa, paragraph 289, When a solution of the route is not found, in a circumstance where the autonomous running apparatus 204 and the wheelchair user 203 approach to each other within the predetermined distance, the running of the autonomous running apparatus 204 may temporarily stop in order to secure the safety of the wheelchair user 203).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Shitamoto and Tanigawa with Ueda to incorporate different robot stop positions within visual field range of multiple pedestrians. By stopping in a visual field range of multiple pedestrians, it possible for the robot to avoid sudden collision with pedestrians by allowing the pedestrians to make a gap for the robot to pass. (Ueda, paragraph 103, when the autonomous moving device 1 moves to TG, it is expected that the pedestrians Cl and C2 perform an avoidance behavior as shown in FIG. 11(b). When the gap between the pedestrians C1 and C2 widens and the autonomous moving device 1 becomes able to move, the autonomous moving device 1 restarts the movement to the final destination point as shown in FIG. 11(c). Ueda, paragraph 104, the autonomous moving device 1 classifies the obstacles according to the avoidance capability thereof and gives avoidance priority to each obstacle and further estimates the passage areas of the obstacles, so that the autonomous moving device 1 does not enter the passage area of a moving body whose avoidance capability is low and moves to a position at which course change of a moving body who has high avoidance capability is small. Therefore, it is possible to safely and efficiently avoid collision between an obstacle and the autonomous moving body).
The combination of Shitamoto and Tanigawa specifically fails to disclose a system to determine, when there are a plurality of traffic participants and a plurality of stop position candidates, a stop position candidate in which a mobile object is included in a visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants among the plurality of stop position candidates as a stop position, and stop the mobile object at the stop position, wherein each of the stop position candidates is a stop position candidate at which the mobile object stops before the plurality of traffic participants and the mobile object pass each other.
However, Ueda, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about an autonomous moving device, discloses a system to determine, when there are a plurality of traffic participants(Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians) and a plurality of stop position candidates(fig. 11(a) of Ueda shows a first stop position(72), fig. 11(b) shows a second stop position(72), fig. 11(c) shows a third stop position(72)), a stop position candidate in which a mobile object is included in a visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants among the plurality of stop position candidates as a stop position(fig. 11 of Ueda shows multiple stop positions( fig. 11(a) first stop position(72) and fig. 11(b) second stop position(72)) that are included in a visual field range of each of the pedestrians(C1,C2,C3)), and stop the mobile object at the stop position, wherein each of the stop position candidates is a stop position candidate at which the mobile object stops before the plurality of traffic participants and the mobile object pass each other(Ueda discloses its robot (1) moves from fig. 11(a)’s first stop position(72) to fig. 11(b)’s second stop position(72) and waits for the pedestrians to widen the gap before passing them. This indicates the robot stopping at each available stop positions to pass the pedestrians(traffic participants). Ueda, paragraph 103, in FIG. 11, all the pedestrians C1, C2, and C3 are classified to the class C, so that the virtual passable area 61 is the same as the passable area 60 as shown in FIG. 11(a). By S105 shown in FIG. 4, TG is set on the median line between the boundary lines of the passage areas 51C1 and 51C2 of the pedestrians C1 and C2, and when the autonomous moving device 1 moves to TG, it is expected that the pedestrians Cl and C2 perform an avoidance behavior as shown in FIG. 11(b). When the gap between the pedestrians C1 and C2 widens and the autonomous moving device 1 becomes able to move, the autonomous moving device 1 restarts the movement to the final destination point as shown in FIG. 11(c)).
PNG
media_image1.png
736
478
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 11 of shows different traffic participants(C1,C2,C3) and stop positions(fig. 11(a) position(72), fig. 11(b) position(72) fig. 11(c) position(72)).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Shitamoto and Tanigawa with Ueda to incorporate different robot stop positions within visual field range of multiple pedestrians. By stopping in a visual field range of multiple pedestrians, it possible for the robot to avoid sudden collision with pedestrians by allowing the pedestrians to make a gap for the robot to pass. (Ueda, paragraph 103, when the autonomous moving device 1 moves to TG, it is expected that the pedestrians Cl and C2 perform an avoidance behavior as shown in FIG. 11(b). When the gap between the pedestrians C1 and C2 widens and the autonomous moving device 1 becomes able to move, the autonomous moving device 1 restarts the movement to the final destination point as shown in FIG. 11(c). Ueda, paragraph 104, the autonomous moving device 1 classifies the obstacles according to the avoidance capability thereof and gives avoidance priority to each obstacle and further estimates the passage areas of the obstacles, so that the autonomous moving device 1 does not enter the passage area of a moving body whose avoidance capability is low and moves to a position at which course change of a moving body who has high avoidance capability is small. Therefore, it is possible to safely and efficiently avoid collision between an obstacle and the autonomous moving body).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Shitamoto, Tanigawa, and Ueda teaches the control system according to claim 1(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction; Tanigawa, paragraph 313, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by; Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians.), wherein the one or more processors execute the computer-readable instructions(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, The electronic control device 20 preferably includes a microprocessor which performs calculations, a ROM storing programs and the like to cause the microprocessor to perform the various types of processing) to assume, when the traffic participant and the mobile object are estimated to pass by each other(Shitamoto, paragraph 55, upon moving along the planned path, detects the as-yet-unknown obstacles that it will encounter by using various types of obstacle sensors. Shitamoto, paragraph 141, the interference determination unit 31 determines that the autonomous mobile body will interfere with the interfering obstacle 66, unless it stops), that the mobile object has stopped at each of the stop position candidates(Ueda discloses its robot (1) moves from fig. 11(a)’s first stop position(72) to fig. 11(b)’s second stop position(72) and waits for the pedestrians to widen the gap before passing them. This indicates the robot stopping at each available stop positions to pass the pedestrians(traffic participants). Ueda, paragraph 103, in FIG. 11, all the pedestrians C1, C2, and C3 are classified to the class C, so that the virtual passable area 61 is the same as the passable area 60 as shown in FIG. 11(a). By S105 shown in FIG. 4, TG is set on the median line between the boundary lines of the passage areas 51C1 and 51C2 of the pedestrians C1 and C2, and when the autonomous moving device 1 moves to TG, it is expected that the pedestrians Cl and C2 perform an avoidance behavior as shown in FIG. 11(b). When the gap between the pedestrians C1 and C2 widens and the autonomous moving device 1 becomes able to move, the autonomous moving device 1 restarts the movement to the final destination point as shown in FIG. 11(c)), which are the plurality of stop position candidates, and determine the stop position candidate in which the mobile object is positioned at or near a center of the visual field range in a horizontal direction among the stop position candidates as the stop position(Ueda’s fig. 11(b)’s second stop position(72) shows the robot (mobile object) is positioned at or near a center of the visual field range. ).
PNG
media_image1.png
736
478
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 11(b) shows a stop position near a center of the visual field range.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Shitamoto, Tanigawa, and Ueda teaches the control system according to claim 1(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction; Tanigawa, paragraph 313, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by; Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians), wherein the one or more processors execute the computer-readable instructions(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, The electronic control device 20 preferably includes a microprocessor which performs calculations, a ROM storing programs and the like to cause the microprocessor to perform the various types of processing) to assume, when the traffic participant and the mobile object are estimated to pass by each other(Shitamoto, paragraph 55, upon moving along the planned path, detects the as-yet-unknown obstacles that it will encounter by using various types of obstacle sensors. Shitamoto, paragraph 141, the interference determination unit 31 determines that the autonomous mobile body will interfere with the interfering obstacle 66, unless it stops), that the mobile object has stopped at each of a plurality of stop position candidates(Ueda discloses its robot (1) moves from fig. 11(a)’s first stop position(72) to fig. 11(b)’s second stop position(72) and waits for the pedestrians to widen the gap before passing them. This indicates the robot stopping at each available stop positions to pass the pedestrians(traffic participants). Ueda, paragraph 103, in FIG. 11, all the pedestrians C1, C2, and C3 are classified to the class C, so that the virtual passable area 61 is the same as the passable area 60 as shown in FIG. 11(a). By S105 shown in FIG. 4, TG is set on the median line between the boundary lines of the passage areas 51C1 and 51C2 of the pedestrians C1 and C2, and when the autonomous moving device 1 moves to TG, it is expected that the pedestrians Cl and C2 perform an avoidance behavior as shown in FIG. 11(b). When the gap between the pedestrians C1 and C2 widens and the autonomous moving device 1 becomes able to move, the autonomous moving device 1 restarts the movement to the final destination point as shown in FIG. 11(c)), and determine the stop position candidate corresponding to the visual field range in which the mobile object is not hidden by the objects and a larger portion of the mobile object is included(As can be seen in fig. 3 of Tanigawa, the robot(14) is not hidden by the object(12 ), and large portion of the robot is included in the visual field range of the wheel chair when the robot stops to let the wheel chair pass )among the stop position candidates as the stop position(Tanigawa, paragraph 313, in a case of an unskilled wheelchair patient (wheelchair beginner), a large weight is put on an arc entering the gaze region. As a result, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by even if the running distance greatly increases).
PNG
media_image2.png
446
623
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 of Tanigawa shows the robot(14) is not hidden by the object(12 ), and large portion of the robot is included in the visual field range of the wheel chair(13).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Shitamoto, Tanigawa, and Ueda teaches the control system according to claim 1(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction; Tanigawa, paragraph 313, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by; Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians), wherein the one or more processors execute the computer-readable instructions(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, The electronic control device 20 preferably includes a microprocessor which performs calculations, a ROM storing programs and the like to cause the microprocessor to perform the various types of processing)
to stop the mobile object at a stop position so that the mobile object is included in the visual field range of the traffic participant on a narrow road where the mobile object needs to move in a width direction to avoid the traffic participant when passing by the traffic participant(Shitamoto teaches “pull-off” direction where the autonomous mobile body moves to a side of a passage to let an obstacle pass, corresponding to the movement of the mobile object in a width direction. Shitamoto, paragraph 56, the term "pull-off" is used to mean that the autonomous mobile body moves to the edge of the passage and waits for the obstacle to pass by. Tanigawa, paragraph 313, in a case of an unskilled wheelchair patient (wheelchair beginner), a large weight is put on an arc entering the gaze region. As a result, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by even if the running distance greatly increases).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Shitamoto, Tanigawa, and Ueda teaches the control system according to claim 1(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction; Tanigawa, paragraph 313, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by; Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians), wherein the one or more processors execute the computer-readable instructions(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, The electronic control device 20 preferably includes a microprocessor which performs calculations, a ROM storing programs and the like to cause the microprocessor to perform the various types of processing)
to move the mobile object in a direction opposite to a direction in which the traffic participant is present with respect to a width direction as the traffic participant approaches the mobile object after the mobile object is moved to the stop position or near the stop position(Shitamoto discloses a retreating action by its autonomous mobile body when it is estimated that an obstacle is present, similar to moving in an opposite direction. Furthermore, as discussed above, Shitamoto teaches “pull-off” direction where the autonomous mobile body moves to a side of a passage to let an obstacle pass, corresponding to the movement of the mobile object with respect to a width direction. Shitamoto, paragraph 56, The retreat action is an action of retreating from a passage on which a path is set. Moreover, in this description, the term "pull-off" is used to mean that the autonomous mobile body moves to the edge of the passage and waits for the obstacle to pass by. The retreat action is the action of the autonomous mobile body 1 retreating from the passage 95 where an interfering obstacle 66 exists. When there is not enough clearance for the autonomous mobile body 1 to pass by the interfering obstacle 66 within the passage 95, the retreat action is selected. Shitamoto, paragraph 6, an autonomous mobile body capable of moving by autonomously setting a pull-off direction so that a movable obstacle can pass through safely).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Shitamoto, Tanigawa, and Ueda teaches the control system according to claim 1(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction; Tanigawa, paragraph 313, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by), wherein the mobile object is capable of autonomously moving in an area where vehicles cannot move and where pedestrians can move(Shitamoto discloses an autonomous mobile body that is deployed in facilities such as hospitals indicating an area where vehicles cannot move in. Shitamoto, paragraph 55, The autonomous mobile body 1 according to this preferred embodiment preferably is, for example, a robot which is deployed in facilities such as a hospital).
Regarding claim 11, Shitamoto teaches a control method comprising(Shitamoto, paragraph 129, The method of the mobile control unit 25 controlling the movement of the autonomous mobile body): by a computer of a control system that controls a mobile object that is capable of autonomously moving in an area(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction) in which a pedestrian is able to move(Shitamoto, paragraph 70, The path planning unit 26 uses the size of the autonomous mobile body and the environmental map to extract a path that the autonomous mobile body can move without interfering with the known obstacles on the environmental map…The path is also set in the region whether people and other autonomous mobile bodies move), recognizing, on the basis of a result of detection by a detection unit that detects objects around the mobile object(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, an obstacle information acquisition unit arranged to acquire obstacle information of obstacles around the autonomous mobile body, an obstacle identification unit arranged to identify, based on the obstacle information acquired by the obstacle information acquisition unit, positions of both ends of a region in which an obstacle positioned in a moving target direction exists. Shitamoto, paragraph 55, upon moving along the planned path, detects the as-yet-unknown obstacles that it will encounter by using various types of obstacle sensors), a traffic participant that is estimated to pass by the mobile object included in the objects(According to the specification, a traffic participant can be a pedestrian or a vehicle. Similarly, Shitamoto discloses its obstacle can include a person. Shitamoto further discloses determining if the obstacle will interfere with its autonomous mobile body. Shitamoto, paragraph 55, upon moving along the planned path, detects the as-yet-unknown obstacles that it will encounter by using various types of obstacle sensors. Shitamoto, paragraph 141, the interference determination unit 31 determines that the autonomous mobile body will interfere with the interfering obstacle 66, unless it stops. Shitamoto, paragraph 86,the as-yet-unknown obstacle includes moving objects such as people) and a stop position to which the mobile object is able to be evacuated (Shitamoto discloses using map and pull-off direction to set a stop position where the autonomous mobile body pulls off to let an obstacle pass. Shitamoto, paragraph 9, a stop position setting unit arranged to set a stop position in the pull-off direction based on the pull-off direction set by the direction setting unit, and an environmental map. Shitamoto, paragraph 6, an autonomous mobile body capable of moving by autonomously setting a pull-off direction so that a movable obstacle can pass through safely);
While Shitamoto teaches about detecting obstacles and stopping a moving object when recognizing an impending interference with a traffic participant, it fails to disclose a method of stopping the mobile object at a stop position so that the mobile object is included in a visual field range of the traffic participant when the traffic participant and the mobile object are estimated to pass by each other, and determining, when there are a plurality of traffic participants and a plurality of stop position candidates, a stop position candidate in which a mobile object is included in a visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants among the plurality of stop position candidates as a stop position, and stop the mobile object at the stop position, wherein each of the stop position candidates is a stop position candidate at which the mobile object stops before the plurality of traffic participants and the mobile object pass each other.
However, Tanigawa, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about a movement information calculator for moving person discloses a method for stopping the mobile object at a stop position so that the mobile object is included in a visual field range of the traffic participant when the traffic participant and the mobile object are estimated to pass by each other, and (Tanigawa discloses an autonomous running apparatus that moves to a gaze region of a person on a wheelchair while avoiding interfering with the wheelchair’s path. Tanigawa, paragraph 313, in a case of an unskilled wheelchair patient (wheelchair beginner), a large weight is put on an arc entering the gaze region. As a result, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by even if the running distance greatly increases. Tanigawa, paragraph 289, When a solution of the route is not found, in a circumstance where the autonomous running apparatus 204 and the wheelchair user 203 approach to each other within the predetermined distance, the running of the autonomous running apparatus 204 may temporarily stop in order to secure the safety of the wheelchair user 203).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Shitamoto with Tanigawa to move autonomous mobile object within visual field range of the traffic participant while avoiding interference. Shitamoto discloses navigating an autonomous mobile body that moves to a stopping position when it estimates an interference with a movable obstacle similar to traffic participant. However, Shitamoto fails to disclose autonomous mobile body moving within field of view of the
movable obstacle while avoiding collision. Tanigawa teaches an autonomous running apparatus that moves within the field of view of a wheelchair(traffic participant) and letting the wheelchair pass safely without interference. By moving within the field of view of a traffic participant, it is possible for traffic participant to notice the presence of an autonomous moving body from significant distance, preparing them to maintain or change their movement and avoid an abrupt change of speed or direction. Furthermore, the autonomous moving body operating in the field of view of the traffic participant increases the accuracy of the autonomous moving body’s path planning system by factoring in the presence of the traffic participant.
The combination of Shitamoto and Tanigawa specifically fails to disclose determining, when there are a plurality of traffic participants and a plurality of stop position candidates, a stop position candidate in which a mobile object is included in a visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants among the plurality of stop position candidates as a stop position, and stop the mobile object at the stop position, wherein each of the stop position candidates is a stop position candidate at which the mobile object stops before the plurality of traffic participants and the mobile object pass each other.
However, Ueda, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about an autonomous moving device, discloses determining, when there are a plurality of traffic participants (Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians)and a plurality of stop position candidates(fig. 11(a) of Ueda shows a first stop position(72), fig. 11(b) shows a second stop position(72) fig. 11(c) shows a third stop position(72), which is a final destination), a stop position candidate in which a mobile object is included in a visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants among the plurality of stop position candidates as a stop position, and stop the mobile object at the stop position, wherein each of the stop position candidates is a stop position candidate at which the mobile object stops before the plurality of traffic participants and the mobile object pass each other.
PNG
media_image1.png
736
478
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 11 of shows different traffic participants(C1,C2,C3) and stop positions(fig. 11(a) position(72), fig. 11(b) position(72) fig. 11(c) position(72)).
Regarding claim 12, Shitamoto teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium that has stored a program(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, The electronic control device 20 preferably includes a microprocessor which performs calculations, a ROM storing programs and the like to cause the microprocessor to perform the various types of processing ) for causing a computer of a control system that controls a mobile object that is capable of autonomously moving in an area(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction) in which a pedestrian is able to move(Shitamoto, paragraph 70, The path planning unit 26 uses the size of the autonomous mobile body and the environmental map to extract a path that the autonomous mobile body can move without interfering with the known obstacles on the environmental map…The path is also set in the region whether people and other autonomous mobile bodies move) to execute: processing of recognizing, on the basis of a result of detection by a detection unit that detects objects around the mobile object(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, an obstacle information acquisition unit arranged to acquire obstacle information of obstacles around the autonomous mobile body, an obstacle identification unit arranged to identify, based on the obstacle information acquired by the obstacle information acquisition unit, positions of both ends of a region in which an obstacle positioned in a moving target direction exists. Shitamoto, paragraph 55, upon moving along the planned path, detects the as-yet-unknown obstacles that it will encounter by using various types of obstacle sensors), a traffic participant that is estimated to pass by the mobile object(According to the specification, a traffic participant can be a pedestrian or a vehicle. Similarly, Shitamoto discloses its obstacle can include a person. Shitamoto further discloses determining if the obstacle will interfere with its autonomous mobile body. Shitamoto, paragraph 55, upon moving along the planned path, detects the as-yet-unknown obstacles that it will encounter by using various types of obstacle sensors. Shitamoto, paragraph 141, the interference determination unit 31 determines that the autonomous mobile body will interfere with the interfering obstacle 66, unless it stops. Shitamoto, paragraph 86,the as-yet-unknown obstacle includes moving objects such as people) included in the objects and a stop position to which the mobile object is able to be evacuated (Shitamoto discloses using map and pull-off direction to set a stop position where the autonomous mobile body pulls off to let an obstacle pass. Shitamoto, paragraph 9, a stop position setting unit arranged to set a stop position in the pull-off direction based on the pull-off direction set by the direction setting unit, and an environmental map. Shitamoto, paragraph 6, an autonomous mobile body capable of moving by autonomously setting a pull-off direction so that a movable obstacle can pass through safely);
While Shitamoto teaches about detecting obstacles and stopping a moving object when recognizing an impending interference with a traffic participant, it fails to disclose processing of stopping the mobile object at a stop position so that the mobile object is included in a visual field range of the traffic participant when the traffic participant and the mobile object are estimated to pass by each other, and processing of determining, when there are a plurality of traffic participants and a plurality of stop position candidates, a stop position candidate in which a mobile object is included in a visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants among the plurality of stop position candidates as a stop position, and stop the mobile object at the stop position, wherein each of the stop position candidates is a stop position candidate at which the mobile object stops before the plurality of traffic participants and the mobile object pass each other.
However, Tanigawa, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about a movement information calculator for moving person discloses processing of stopping the mobile object at a stop position so that the mobile object is included in a visual field range of the traffic participant when the traffic participant and the mobile object are estimated to pass by each other, and (Tanigawa discloses an autonomous running apparatus that moves to a gaze region of a person on a wheelchair while avoiding interfering with the wheelchair’s path. Tanigawa, paragraph 313, in a case of an unskilled wheelchair patient (wheelchair beginner), a large weight is put on an arc entering the gaze region. As a result, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by even if the running distance greatly increases. Tanigawa, paragraph 289, When a solution of the route is not found, in a circumstance where the autonomous running apparatus 204 and the wheelchair user 203 approach to each other within the predetermined distance, the running of the autonomous running apparatus 204 may temporarily stop in order to secure the safety of the wheelchair user 203).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Shitamoto with Tanigawa to move autonomous mobile object within visual field range of the traffic participant while avoiding interference. Shitamoto discloses navigating an autonomous mobile body that moves to a stopping position when it estimates an interference with a movable obstacle similar to traffic participant. However, Shitamoto fails to disclose autonomous mobile body moving within field of view of the
movable obstacle while avoiding collision. Tanigawa teaches an autonomous running apparatus that moves within the field of view of a wheelchair(traffic participant) and letting the wheelchair pass safely without interference. By moving within the field of view of a traffic participant, it is possible for traffic participant to notice the presence of an autonomous moving body from significant distance, preparing them to maintain or change their movement and avoid an abrupt change of speed or direction. Furthermore, the autonomous moving body operating in the field of view of the traffic participant increases the accuracy of the autonomous moving body’s path planning system by factoring in the presence of the traffic participant.
The combination of Shitamoto and Tanigawa specifically fails to disclose a system to determine, when there are a plurality of traffic participants and a plurality of stop position candidates, a stop position candidate in which a mobile object is included in a visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants among the plurality of stop position candidates as a stop position, and stop the mobile object at the stop position, wherein each of the stop position candidates is a stop position candidate at which the mobile object stops before the plurality of traffic participants and the mobile object pass each other.
However, Ueda, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about an autonomous moving device, discloses a system to determine, when there are a plurality of traffic participants(Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians) and a plurality of stop position candidates(fig. 11(a) of Ueda shows a first stop position(72), fig. 11(b) shows a second stop position(72), fig. 11(c) shows a third stop position(72)), a stop position candidate in which a mobile object is included in a visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants among the plurality of stop position candidates as a stop position(fig. 11 of Ueda shows multiple stop positions( fig. 11(a) first stop position(72) and fig. 11(b) second stop position(72)) that are included in a visual field range of each of the pedestrians(C1,C2,C3)), and stop the mobile object at the stop position, wherein each of the stop position candidates is a stop position candidate at which the mobile object stops before the plurality of traffic participants and the mobile object pass each other(Ueda discloses its robot (1) moves from fig. 11(a)’s first stop position(72) to fig. 11(b)’s second stop position(72) and waits for the pedestrians to widen the gap before passing them. This indicates the robot stopping at each available stop positions to pass the pedestrians(traffic participants). Ueda, paragraph 103, in FIG. 11, all the pedestrians C1, C2, and C3 are classified to the class C, so that the virtual passable area 61 is the same as the passable area 60 as shown in FIG. 11(a). By S105 shown in FIG. 4, TG is set on the median line between the boundary lines of the passage areas 51C1 and 51C2 of the pedestrians C1 and C2, and when the autonomous moving device 1 moves to TG, it is expected that the pedestrians Cl and C2 perform an avoidance behavior as shown in FIG. 11(b). When the gap between the pedestrians C1 and C2 widens and the autonomous moving device 1 becomes able to move, the autonomous moving device 1 restarts the movement to the final destination point as shown in FIG. 11(c)).
PNG
media_image1.png
736
478
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 11 of shows different traffic participants(C1,C2,C3) and stop positions(fig. 11(a) position(72), fig. 11(b) position(72) fig. 11(c) position(72)).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Shitamoto and Tanigawa with Ueda to incorporate different robot stop positions within visual field range of multiple pedestrians. By stopping in a visual field range of multiple pedestrians, it possible for the robot to avoid sudden collision with pedestrians by allowing the pedestrians to make a gap for the robot to pass. (Ueda, paragraph 103, when the autonomous moving device 1 moves to TG, it is expected that the pedestrians Cl and C2 perform an avoidance behavior as shown in FIG. 11(b). When the gap between the pedestrians C1 and C2 widens and the autonomous moving device 1 becomes able to move, the autonomous moving device 1 restarts the movement to the final destination point as shown in FIG. 11(c). Ueda, paragraph 104, the autonomous moving device 1 classifies the obstacles according to the avoidance capability thereof and gives avoidance priority to each obstacle and further estimates the passage areas of the obstacles, so that the autonomous moving device 1 does not enter the passage area of a moving body whose avoidance capability is low and moves to a position at which course change of a moving body who has high avoidance capability is small. Therefore, it is possible to safely and efficiently avoid collision between an obstacle and the autonomous moving body).
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shitamoto (US 20130116880 A1) in view of Tanigawa (US 20150234383 A1) in further view of Ueda (US 20140148989 A1) in further view of Beaurepaire (US 20220391806 A1).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Shitamoto, Tanigawa, and Ueda teaches the control system according to claim 1(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction; Tanigawa, paragraph 313, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by; Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians), wherein the one or more processors execute the computer-readable instructions(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, The electronic control device 20 preferably includes a microprocessor which performs calculations, a ROM storing programs and the like to cause the microprocessor to perform the various types of processing)
to obtain, when the traffic participant and the mobile object are estimated to pass by each other(Shitamoto, paragraph 55, upon moving along the planned path, detects the as-yet-unknown obstacles that it will encounter by using various types of obstacle sensors. Shitamoto, paragraph 141, the interference determination unit 31 determines that the autonomous mobile body will interfere with the interfering obstacle 66, unless it stops), there are a plurality of traffic participants and(Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians),
The combination of Shitamoto, Tanigawa, and Ueda fails to disclose the mobile object is assumed to have stopped at each of a plurality of stop position candidates, an index for each of the plurality of traffic participants for each of the stop position candidates, based on a size of an area in which the mobile object is recognizable without being hidden by an object in the visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants for each of the stop position candidates;
determine a stop position candidate having the largest index among a plurality of indexes obtained by performing statistical processing on the indexes of the plurality of traffic participants for each of the stop position candidates as a stop position.
However, Beaurepaire, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about computing visibility values for locations for parking shared vehicles discloses the mobile object is assumed to have stopped at each of a plurality of stop position candidates(While Ueda demonstrated stopping at different location, it fails to disclose visibility index value for each position. Beaurepaire indicates evaluating the visibility index of different location to determine the location with the highest visibility. Beaurepaire, paragraph 25, A visibility index map may be created with all the computed values for different locations), an index for each of the plurality of traffic participants for each of the stop position candidates, based on a size of an area in which the mobile object is recognizable without being hidden by an object in the visual field range of each of the plurality of traffic participants for each of the stop position candidates(The size of area of the mobile object that is recognizable corresponds to Beaurepaire’s visibility determination where it determines the visibility value of a vehicle that is not hidden at a location. Beaurepaire, paragraph 25, A visibility index map may be created with all the computed values for different locations. Beaurepaire, paragraph 34, The visibility value for a location may be calculated as a function of the pedestrian paths, pedestrian flow, and line of sight data, among other data. The visibility values may be computed to reflect the difficulty to find a shared vehicle 124 at a location, for example, from 0 to 1. On one end of the spectrum, the value 1 means that the shared vehicle 124 is effortlessly visible from the street when people are passing by, while the value 0 means that the shared vehicle 124 is completely hidden.),
and determine a stop position candidate having the largest index among a plurality of indexes obtained by performing statistical processing on the indexes of the plurality of traffic participants for each of the stop position candidates as a stop position(As discussed above, Beaurepaire indicates evaluating the visibility index of different location to determine the location with the highest visibility. Beaurepaire, paragraph 91, the device 122 recommends a second parking location that includes a higher visibility value than the first parking location. Beaurepaire paragraph 25, A visibility index map may be created with all the computed values for different locations.).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Shitamoto, Tanigawa, and Ueda with Beaurepaire to determine a stop position with the highest visibility index where large part of the autonomous moving body is visible not hidden by obstacle. By determining a stop position with the highest visibility index, it is possible to navigate the autonomous moving body to the position with the highest visibility index, and increase pedestrians’ awareness of the presence of the autonomous moving body. The awareness of the pedestrians’ helps reduce collision risks. Additionally, as discusses above, the inclusion of different traffic participants improves the autonomous moving body’s path planning system.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Shitamoto, Tanigawa, and Ueda teaches the control system according to claim 1(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction; Tanigawa, paragraph 313, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by; Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians), wherein the one or more processors execute the computer-readable instructions(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, The electronic control device 20 preferably includes a microprocessor which performs calculations, a ROM storing programs and the like to cause the microprocessor to perform the various types of processing) to assume, when the traffic participant and the mobile object are estimated to pass by each other(Shitamoto, paragraph 55, upon moving along the planned path, detects the as-yet-unknown obstacles that it will encounter by using various types of obstacle sensors. Shitamoto, paragraph 141, the interference determination unit 31 determines that the autonomous mobile body will interfere with the interfering obstacle 66, unless it stops), that the mobile object has stopped at each of a plurality of stop position candidates(Beaurepaire paragraph 25, A visibility index map may be created with all the computed values for different locations), and determine the stop position on the basis of index information in which an index corresponding to a degree of deviation of a horizontal distance from a center of the visual field range in a horizontal direction is associated and a position of the mobile object in the horizontal direction(The degree of deviation of a horizontal distance is assumed to be an increase in the longitudinal distance from the visual field range of the traffic participant. Beaurepaire discusses the visibility index depending in the vehicle’s horizontal distance from the line of sight of the user. Beaurepaire, paragraph 64, The value may gradually decrease or increase based on the distance of the shared vehicle 124 to the street or sidewalk. As an example, a shared vehicle 124 located 2 meters from the sidewalk may be much more visible than a shared vehicle 124 that is 20 meters from the sidewalk even if both locations have sight lines that are not blocked ), which is not hidden by the object corresponding to each of the stop position candidates in the visual field range( Beaurepaire, paragraph 5, computing a visibility value for the possible storage location as a function of the plurality of pedestrian paths and line of sight data; and storing the visibility value for the possible storage location in a visibility index.).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Shitamoto, Tanigawa, and Ueda teaches the control system according to claim 6(Shitamoto, paragraph 7, a mobile controller arranged and programmed to control the autonomous mobile body to move in the pull-off direction; Tanigawa, paragraph 313, the autonomous running apparatus 204 takes a behavior to avoid the wheelchair patient with a long distance or stop until the wheelchair patient passes by; Ueda, paragraph 102, fig. 11 is a case in which the passage through which the autonomous moving device 1 is passing is blocked by three pedestrians; Beaurepaire, paragraph 5, computing a visibility value for the possible storage location as a function of the plurality of pedestrian paths and line of sight data ), wherein the index information is set to have a lower index as a horizontal distance from the center of the visual field range in the horizontal direction increases(Beaurepaire, paragraph 64, The value may gradually decrease or increase based on the distance of the shared vehicle 124 to the street or sidewalk. As an example, a shared vehicle 124 located 2 meters from the sidewalk may be much more visible than a shared vehicle 124 that is 20 meters from the sidewalk even if both locations have sight lines that are not blocked. Beaurepaire, paragraph 61, Distance may also be a factor. Even with an unobstructed view of a location, a potential user may not be able to identify or see a shared vehicle 124 at the location if the location is too far away ), and the one or more processors execute the computer-readable instructions(Shitamoto, paragraph 63, The electronic control device 20 preferably includes a microprocessor which performs calculations, a ROM storing programs and the like to cause the microprocessor to perform the various types of processing) to derive a sum of the indexes of the index information corresponding to the position of the mobile object in the horizontal direction with respect to each of the visual field ranges of a plurality of traffic participants(The computing of different visibility values for each pedestrians indicate an aggregation or addition of values corresponding to sum of the indexes. Beaurepaire, paragraph 5, computing a visibility value for the possible storage location as a function of the plurality of pedestrian paths and line of sight data; and storing the visibility value for the possible storage location in a visibility index. Beaurepaire, paragraph 61, Distance may also be a factor. Even with an unobstructed view of a location, a potential user may not be able to identify or see a shared vehicle 124 at the location if the location is too far away. Beaurepaire, paragraph 64, The value may gradually decrease or increase based on the distance of the shared vehicle 124 to the street or sidewalk. As an example, a shared vehicle 124 located 2 meters from the sidewalk may be much more visible than a shared vehicle 124 that is 20 meters from the sidewalk even if both locations have sight lines that are not blocked), and determine the stop position by referring to each of the derived sums(After the determination of visibility index based on different factors such as distance, Beaurepaire discloses recommending vehicle stopping/parking location with the higher visibility value. Beaurepaire, paragraph 91, the device 122 recommends a second parking location that includes a higher visibility value than the first parking location. Beaurepaire, paragraph 5, computing a visibility value for the possible storage location as a function of the plurality of pedestrian paths and line of sight data; and storing the visibility value for the possible storage location in a visibility index ).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BESUFEKAD LEMMA TESSEMA whose telephone number is (571)272-6850. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at 5712727298. 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.
/BESUFEKAD LEMMA TESSEMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/HUNTER B LONSBERRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights