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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Claims 1-3, 8, 10, 12-15, and 19 are presented as currently amended claims.
No claims are newly presented.
No claims are cancelled.
Examiner's Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs / columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicants’ definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
Claim 3 contains contingent apparatus limitations. “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a system (or apparatus or product) claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur.” MPEP § 2111.04(II).
Claim 14 contains contingent limitation modifying a method. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has previously held that “giving the claim its broadest reasonable interpretation, ‘[i]f the condition for performing a contingent step is not satisfied, the performance recited by the step need not be carried out in order for the claimed method to be performed’". (MPEP § 2111.04(II) quoting Ex parte Schulhauser, Appeal 2013-007847 (PTAB April 28, 2016) at 10 (quotation omitted)). Consequently, the contingent limitations of method claim CCC have not been given patentable weight.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Amended claims recite a “measured shape”. Applicant’s specification with the filling date of November 26, 2024 does not describe a measured shape and the claims filed of the same date do not describe how a shape is measured. Claims 2-11 and 13-20 are rejected due to dependency on a previous rejected claim. Correction or clarification is required.
Claims 1 and 12 are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 12 recite “. . . wherein the sensor data comprises a measured shape of the second robot and a reference shape of the second robot at a reference angle; . . . and a processor configured to: determine, based on the measured shape of the second robot and the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle, a first angle between the first robot and the second robot . . .” without definition of how the shape relates to the measured angle. Determining an angle requires defining two non-parallel lines. It is unclear what lines on the robots are being used to define the first, second, and third angles. While the recited limitations are provided the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, the scope of the claim is rendered indefinite. For the purposes of the prior art rejection and consistent with the arguments presented with the amended claims
the first angle has been interpreted to be the angle of a line parallel with the intended coupling surface of the first robot intersecting with a line connecting each of the two coupling points on the two robots.
the second angle has been interpreted to be the angle of a line parallel with the intended coupling surface of the second robot intersecting with a line connecting each of the two coupling points on the two robots.
The third angle has been interpreted to be the difference between the first and second angle.
Claims 2-11 and 13-20 are rejected due to dependency on a previous rejected claim. Correction or clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-13, 15-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grodde et al. (US 20200247471 A1) in view of Katsuki et al. (US 20240270259 A1) in view of Ramirez et al (US 20190337343 A1) (the combination of which will be referred to as 'combination Grodde' hereinafter). As regards the individual claims:
Regarding claim 1, Grodde teaches a system for controlling driving of a first robot, the system comprising:
the first robot configured to drive a second robot, wherein a rear side of the first robot is configured to be mechanically coupled to the second robot; (Grodde: ¶ 012; implemented on a trailer and a vehicle) a first sensor configured to obtain sensor data for the second robot coupled to the rear side of the first robot, wherein the sensor data comprises a measured shape of the second robot and a reference shape of the second robot at a reference angle; (Grodde: ¶ 137; 3-D position sensor) . . . a first angle between the first robot and the second robot, (Grodde: ¶ 048; a 3-D position sensor is a sensor that can measure or detect changes in position on three axes (e.g., x-axis, y-axis, z-axis) (Grodde: ¶ 137; By using the 3-D position sensors 720 and 722 placed on opposing ends of the vehicle 732, the processor 704 on the controller 702 can identify spatial positions and accelerations of the opposing ends vehicle 732 by calculating differences between the 3-D position sensors) (Grodde: ¶ 052; Two variables for orientation of the vehicle relative to the x-axis are Θ1(car) and Θ2(trailer)) . . .
To the extent Grodde is silent about or does not explicitly teach: . . . a second sensor configured to obtain a rear view image from the first robot, wherein the rear view image comprises an image of the second robot coupled to the rear side of the first robot; and determine, based on the measured shape of the second robot and the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle, . . . determine, based on the first angle between the first robot and the second robot and the second angle between the first robot and the second robot, a third angle between the first robot and the second robot, . . .Ramirez teaches:
: . . . a second sensor configured to obtain a rear view image from the first robot, wherein the rear view image comprises an image of the second robot coupled to the rear side of the first robot; and (Ramirez: ¶ 028; rear camera 142a that is mounted to provide images 143 with a view of a rear-driving path for the tow vehicle) a processor configured to: (Ramirez: ¶ 027; processor) determine, based on the measured shape of the second robot and the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle, (Ramirez: ¶ 043; executes a computer vision-based identification algorithm (e.g., neural networks, correlation filters, etc.) to find the known shapes of the tow-bar 214 or coupler 212 as projected on the camera plane) . . . determine, based on the first angle between the first robot and the second robot and the second angle between the first robot and the second robot, a third angle between the first robot and the second robot, (Ramirez: ¶ 043; detection module 164 may then determine the direction of alignment 220 (FIGS. 6A and 6B) of the trailer 200 with respect to the tow vehicle 100 based on the determined position L.sub.TC of the coupler 212 and the determined position L.sub.TB of the tow-bar 214 and the shape of the trailer hitch . . . detection module 164 determines the alignment direction of the trailer 200 relative to the tow vehicle 100 within the camera plane 310.)..
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ramirez with the teachings of Grodde because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of allowing a single camera system (Ramirez: ¶ 024).
To the extent Grodde is silent about or does not explicitly teach: . . .determine, based on the rear view image, a second angle between the first robot and the second robot, . . . output a signal associated with the third angle, and control, based on the signal, the driving of the first robot; Katsuki does teach:
determine, based on the rear view image, a second angle between the first robot and the second robot, (Katsuki: ¶ 040; a camera device) (Katsuki: ¶ 074; straight line extraction unit 304 extracts a straight line portion of the object on the towed vehicle 3 in step S29, based on the measurement information measured by the sensor 20, the long side estimation unit 307 estimates the long side portion of the target member 40-3, based on the information on the extracted straight line portion.) . . . output a signal associated with the third angle, and control, based on the signal, the driving of the first robot. (Katsuki: ¶ 014; driving control unit that causes an own vehicle to drive automatically, and changes contents of automatic driving when the coupling angle detected by the coupling angle detection unit has reached a prescribed value or more.)
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Katsuki with the teachings of Grodde because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of "accurately detect[ing] a coupling angle between two vehicles constituting a combination vehicle with simple processing." (Katsuki: ¶ 017).
Regarding claim 2, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Katsuki further teaches:
wherein: the first sensor is configured to: acquire the measured shape of the second robot; (Katsuki: ¶ 008; a first vehicle and a second vehicle coupled to the first vehicle in accordance with an embodiment of the disclosure includes: a target member having a prescribed shape and installed in the first vehicle; a shape information acquisition unit that is installed in the second vehicle and acquires a shape information of the target member;) and the processor is further configured to: move the first robot and the second robot straight forward to acquire a the measured shape of the second robot at a reference angle, (Katsuki: ¶ 103; During traveling of the towed motor vehicle 1E, the sensor 20 measures the distance to a plurality of measurement points in the object including the target member 40-7 positioned in the upper surface area of the towed vehicle 3 at prescribed time intervals. The sensor 20 extracts measurement information regarding the plurality of measurement points in the target member) (Katsuki: ¶ 074; may self-calibrate the hitch angle between vehicle 232 and trailer 230 while the vehicle 232 and the trailer 230 are in motion) determine whether the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle and the measured shape of the second robot match, and determine, based on the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle and the current shape of the second robot matching, the first angle. (Katsuki: ¶ 105; when the filtering unit 302 extracts measurement information whose ranging distance is within a prescribed range through filtering processing, the processing proceeds to step S73. In step S73, the rotation angle calculation unit 310 calculates the rotation angle between the measurement point groups relative to the position of the sensor 20, based on the measurement information extracted by filtering processing and the position information) (Katsuki: ¶ 102; one target member 40-7 formed in a rectangular shape is installed on the towed vehicle 3. In the present embodiment, the rotation angle calculation unit 310 holds position information on a plurality of measurement point groups in the target member 40-7 measured by the sensor 20 when the coupling angle is 0°, as the shape information of the target member 40-7) (Katsuki: ¶ 008; shape information of the target member acquired by the shape information acquisition unit, as a front-rear direction of a vehicle body of the first vehicle, and detects an angle formed by the front-rear direction of the vehicle body of the second vehicle that is held and the front-rear direction of the vehicle body of the first vehicle that is recognized, as a coupling angle between the first vehicle and the second vehicle)
Regarding claim 4, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Katsuki further teaches:
wherein the processor is further configured to: extract a feature point of the second robot from the rear view image, generate depth data of the feature point of the second robot, (Katsuki: ¶ 042; unit 301 acquires information on the ranging distance to a plurality of measurement points and the ranging direction, by means of the sensor 20,)
(Katsuki: ¶ 044; information constituting the respective target members 40-1 and 40-2, based on the measurement information on the measurement points corresponding to the respective target members 40-1 and 40-2 which are recognized. The corner estimation unit 305 estimates a corner portion which is a corner of each of the target members 40-1 and 40-2, based on the information on the straight line portion extracted by the straight line extraction unit 304.) generate a depth map representing a depth data set based on the first angle by matching the first angle and the depth data of the feature point, and determine the second angle by comparing the depth data set with a current depth data set. (Katsuki: ¶ 045; based on the straight line connecting an apex of each corner portion of the target members 40-1 and 40-2 estimated by the corner estimation unit . . .detects an angle formed by the front-rear direction of the vehicle body of the towing vehicle 2 as held above and the front-rear direction of the vehicle body of the towed vehicle 3 as recognized above, as a coupling angle of the towing motor vehicle 1A.)
Regarding claim 5, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 4. Katsuki further teaches:
wherein the processor is further configured to generate the depth map based on a number of the depth data set being greater than or equal to a threshold number of sets, and wherein the depth data set is collected for any initial angle. (Katsuki: ¶ 054; extracts a measurement point group whose number of corresponding measurement points is equal to or greater than a prescribed first threshold value. This first threshold value is a value that is set to determine the reliability of the grouped measurement point group as a straight line portion)
Regarding claim 7, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 4. Katsuki further teaches:
wherein the processor is further configured to: move the first robot and the second robot straight forward, and (Katsuki: ¶ 074; may self-calibrate the hitch angle between vehicle 232 and trailer 230 while the vehicle 232 and the trailer 230 are in motion) (Katsuki: ¶ 014; an automatic driving control unit that causes an own vehicle to drive automatically,) separate the feature point of the second robot from a feature point of a surrounding environment of the second robot based on extracting the feature point of the second robot from the rear view image. (Katsuki: ¶ 103; During traveling of the towed motor vehicle 1E, the sensor 20 measures the distance to a plurality of measurement points in the object including the target member 40-7 positioned in the upper surface area of the towed vehicle 3 at prescribed time intervals. The sensor 20 extracts measurement information regarding the plurality of measurement points in the target member)
Regarding claim 8, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Grodde further teaches:
further comprising: a third sensor configured to obtain movement data of the first robot and the second robot; and (Grodde: ¶ 036; placing one 9-D IMU sensor on the vehicle and the other 9-D IMU sensor on the trailer allows for independent tracking of the vehicle and the trailer, which provides more accurate positional information and better guidance on terrain with elevation changes.) a fourth sensor configured to obtain sensor data of an object in front of the first robot and the second robot, (Grodde: ¶ 102; two camera sensors behind the trailer can detect potential obstructions or hazards, as well as measure an approximate distance until the ending position is reached) wherein the processor is configured to: (Grodde: ¶ 250; processor) determine a fourth angle between the first robot and the second robot based on: a local map storing a feature point of a surrounding environment, the movement data, the sensor data for the second robot, and the sensor data of the object and wherein the signal is further associated with the fourth angle. (Grodde: ¶ 250; Implementing the Dubins Path Method in this manner reduces the chance that the vehicle and trailer will jackknife by utilizing a small turning radius (or in some cases the smallest turn radius possible).) (Grodde: ¶ 112; a custom path is calculated as shown in FIG. 5C. The custom path 598 is different from the custom path of FIGS. 4A-D (see reference number 474, FIGS. 4A-D). Calculation of the custom path 598 can be accomplished using Dijkstra's algorithm, or any other suitable method. Generally, the custom path 598 intersects with various path grid 596 points that do not intersect with any obstacles 590 (or other forbidden areas).) (Grodde: Fig. 5D; [Map showing determining a 4th angle with respect to an obstacle])
PNG
media_image1.png
588
526
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 8. Grodde further teaches:
wherein the processor is further configured to: obtain first absolute positions of the first robot and the second robot based on the sensor data for the second robot (Grodde: ¶ 082; GPS information of the trailer and the 3-D position sensors placed independently on the vehicle and the trailer (i.e., instead of solely using a single 2-D bend angle senor), the absolute positions of the vehicle and the trailer can be assessed and tracked in real-time by calculating orientation differences between the 3-D position sensors.) and the local map, (Grodde: ¶ 037; map data allows a driver to plot or navigate around objects and blind corners.) obtain second absolute positions of the first robot and the second robot based on the movement data and the local map, and determine, based on the first absolute positions and the second absolute positions, the fourth angle. (Grodde: ¶ 130; process 600 comprises acquiring at 616 tracking data of the vehicle by utilizing the first 3-D position sensor, the second 3-D position sensor, and the global positioning system as the vehicle traverses from the starting position to the ending position along the custom path) (Grodde: Fig. 5D; [Map showing determining a 4th angle with respect to an obstacle])
Regarding claim 10, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 8. Katsuki teaches:
wherein the third sensor comprises at least one of: an encoder provided in the first robot and the second robot and configured to measure information on a rotation of a wheel; or (Katsuki: ¶ 075; encoder 45 measures information about rotation of the driving motor or the wheel provided in the robot.)
And Grodde teaches: an inertial sensor provided in the first robot and the second robot and configured to measure information on a movement situation of the first robot and the second robot. (Grodde: ¶ 036; placing one 9-D IMU sensor on the vehicle and the other 9-D IMU sensor on the trailer allows for independent tracking of the vehicle and the trailer, which provides more accurate positional information and better guidance on terrain with elevation changes.)
Regarding claim 11, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Katsuki further teaches:
wherein: the first robot is an autonomous moving robot. (Katsuki: ¶ 120; driving robot may be an autonomous moving robot.)
Regarding claim 12, Grodde teaches a method performed by a system for:
controlling driving of a first robot, the method comprising: obtaining, from a first sensor, a sensor data for a second robot (Grodde: ¶ 137; 3-D position sensor) mechanically coupled to a rear side of the first robot, wherein the sensor data comprises a measured shape of the second robot and a reference shape of the second robot at a reference angle; (Grodde: ¶ 012; implemented on a trailer and a vehicle) . . . a first angle between the first robot and the second robot; (Grodde: ¶ 048; a 3-D position sensor is a sensor that can measure or detect changes in position on three axes (e.g., x-axis, y-axis, z-axis) (Grodde: ¶ 137; By using the 3-D position sensors 720 and 722 placed on opposing ends of the vehicle 732, the processor 704 on the controller 702 can identify spatial positions and accelerations of the opposing ends vehicle 732 by calculating differences between the 3-D position sensors) (Grodde: ¶ 052; Two variables for orientation of the vehicle relative to the x-axis are Θ1(car) and Θ2(trailer),) (Grodde: ¶ 152; a hitch angle (δ) may be resolved via: δ=Θ1−Θ2.) . . .
To the extent Grodde is silent about or does not explicitly teach: . . . obtaining, from a second sensor, a rear view image from the first robot, wherein the rear view image comprises an image of the second robot coupled to the rear side of the first robot; determining, based on themeasured shape of the second robot and the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle, . . . determining, based on the first angle between the first robot and the second robot and the second angle between the first robot and the second robot, a third angle between the first robot and the second robot; . . .; Ramirez teaches:
obtaining, from a second sensor, a rear view image from the first robot, wherein the rear view image comprises an image of the second robot coupled to the rear side of the first robot; (Ramirez: ¶ 028; rear camera 142a that is mounted to provide images 143 with a view of a rear-driving path for the tow vehicle)determining, based on themeasured shape of the second robot and the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle, (Ramirez: ¶ 043; executes a computer vision-based identification algorithm (e.g., neural networks, correlation filters, etc.) to find the known shapes of the tow-bar 214 or coupler 212 as projected on the camera plane) . . . determining, based on the first angle between the first robot and the second robot and the second angle between the first robot and the second robot, a third angle between the first robot and the second robot; (Ramirez: ¶ 043; detection module 164 may then determine the direction of alignment 220 (FIGS. 6A and 6B) of the trailer 200 with respect to the tow vehicle 100 based on the determined position L.sub.TC of the coupler 212 and the determined position L.sub.TB of the tow-bar 214 and the shape of the trailer hitch . . . detection module 164 determines the alignment direction of the trailer 200 relative to the tow vehicle 100 within the camera plane 310.) ...
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ramirez with the teachings of Grodde because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of allowing a single camera system (Ramirez: ¶ 024).
To the extent Grodde is silent about or does not explicitly teach: determining, based on the rear view image, a second angle between the first robot and the second robot; . . . outputting a signal associated with the third angle; and controlling, based on the signal, driving of the first robot. Katsuki does teach:
determining, based on the rear view image, a second angle between the first robot and the second robot; (Katsuki: ¶ 040; a camera device) (Katsuki: ¶ 017) (Katsuki: ¶ 074; straight line extraction unit 304 extracts a straight line portion of the object on the towed vehicle 3 in step S29, based on the measurement information measured by the sensor 20, the long side estimation unit 307 estimates the long side portion of the target member 40-3, based on the information on the extracted straight line portion.) . . . outputting a signal associated with the third angle; and controlling, based on the signal, driving of the first robot. (Katsuki: ¶ 014; driving control unit that causes an own vehicle to drive automatically, and changes contents of automatic driving when the coupling angle detected by the coupling angle detection unit has reached a prescribed value or more.)
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Katsuki with the teachings of Grodde because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of "accurately detect[ing] a coupling angle between two vehicles constituting a combination vehicle with simple processing."
Regarding claim 13, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 12. Katsuki further teaches:
wherein the determining the first angle comprises: moving the first robot and the second robot straight forward to acquire the reference shape of the second robot at a reference angle; (Katsuki: ¶ 103; During traveling of the towed motor vehicle 1E, the sensor 20 measures the distance to a plurality of measurement points in the object including the target member 40-7 positioned in the upper surface area of the towed vehicle 3 at prescribed time intervals. The sensor 20 extracts measurement information regarding the plurality of measurement points in the target member) (Katsuki: ¶ 074; may self-calibrate the hitch angle between vehicle 232 and trailer 230 while the vehicle 232 and the trailer 230 are in motion) acquiring the measured shape of the second robot; determining whether the eference shape of the second robot at the reference angle and the measured shape of the second robot match; and determining, based on the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle and the measured shape of the second robot matching, the first angle. (Katsuki: ¶ 105; when the filtering unit 302 extracts measurement information whose ranging distance is within a prescribed range through filtering processing, the processing proceeds to step S73. In step S73, the rotation angle calculation unit 310 calculates the rotation angle between the measurement point groups relative to the position of the sensor 20, based on the measurement information extracted by filtering processing and the position information) (Katsuki: ¶ 102; one target member 40-7 formed in a rectangular shape is installed on the towed vehicle 3. In the present embodiment, the rotation angle calculation unit 310 holds position information on a plurality of measurement point groups in the target member 40-7 measured by the sensor 20 when the coupling angle is 0°, as the shape information of the target member 40-7) (Katsuki: ¶ 008; shape information of the target member acquired by the shape information acquisition unit, as a front-rear direction of a vehicle body of the first vehicle, and detects an angle formed by the front-rear direction of the vehicle body of the second vehicle that is held and the front-rear direction of the vehicle body of the first vehicle that is recognized, as a coupling angle between the first vehicle and the second vehicle)
Regarding claim 15, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 12. Katsuki further teaches:
wherein the determining the second angle comprises: extracting a feature point of the second robot from the rear view image; generating a depth data of the feature point of the second robot; (Katsuki: ¶ 042; unit 301 acquires information on the ranging distance to a plurality of measurement points and the ranging direction, by means of the sensor 20,) (Katsuki: ¶ 044; information constituting the respective target members 40-1 and 40-2, based on the measurement information on the measurement points corresponding to the respective target members 40-1 and 40-2 which are recognized. The corner estimation unit 305 estimates a corner portion which is a corner of each of the target members 40-1 and 40-2, based on the information on the straight line portion extracted by the straight line extraction unit 304.) generating depth map representing a depth data set based on the first angle by matching the first angle and the depth data of the feature point; and determining the second angle by comparing the depth data set with a current depth data set. (Katsuki: ¶ 045; based on the straight line connecting an apex of each corner portion of the target members 40-1 and 40-2 estimated by the corner estimation unit . . .detects an angle formed by the front-rear direction of the vehicle body of the towing vehicle 2 as held above and the front-rear direction of the vehicle body of the towed vehicle 3 as recognized above, as a coupling angle of the towing motor vehicle 1A.)
Regarding claim 16, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 15. Katsuki further teaches:
wherein the determining the second angle comprises: generating the depth map based on a number of the depth data set being greater than or equal to a threshold number of sets, and wherein the depth data set is collected for any initial angle. (Katsuki: ¶ 054; extracts a measurement point group whose number of corresponding measurement points is equal to or greater than a prescribed first threshold value. This first threshold value is a value that is set to determine the reliability of the grouped measurement point group as a straight line portion)
Regarding claim 18, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 15. Katsuki further teaches:
wherein the extracting the feature point comprises: moving the first robot and the second robot straight forward; and (Katsuki: ¶ 074; may self-calibrate the hitch angle between vehicle 232 and trailer 230 while the vehicle 232 and the trailer 230 are in motion) (Katsuki: ¶ 014; an automatic driving control unit that causes an own vehicle to drive automatically,) separating the feature point of the second robot from a feature point of a surrounding environment of the second robot. (Katsuki: ¶ 103; During traveling of the towed motor vehicle 1E, the sensor 20 measures the distance to a plurality of measurement points in the object including the target member 40-7 positioned in the upper surface area of the towed vehicle 3 at prescribed time intervals. The sensor 20 extracts measurement information regarding the plurality of measurement points in the target member)
Regarding claim 19, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 12. Grodde further teaches:
further comprising: obtaining, from a third sensor, movement data of the first robot and the second robot; (Grodde: ¶ 036; placing one 9-D IMU sensor on the vehicle and the other 9-D IMU sensor on the trailer allows for independent tracking of the vehicle and the trailer, which provides more accurate positional information and better guidance on terrain with elevation changes.) obtaining, from a fourth sensor, sensor data of an object in front of the first robot and the second robot; (Grodde: ¶ 102; two camera sensors behind the trailer can detect potential obstructions or hazards, as well as measure an approximate distance until the ending position is reached) and determining a fourth angle between the first robot and the second robot based on: a local map storing a feature point of a surrounding environment, the movement data, the sensor data of the object; wherein the signal is further associated with the fourth angle. (Grodde: ¶ 250; Implementing the Dubins Path Method in this manner reduces the chance that the vehicle and trailer will jackknife by utilizing a small turning radius (or in some cases the smallest turn radius possible).) (Grodde: ¶ 112; a custom path is calculated as shown in FIG. 5C. The custom path 598 is different from the custom path of FIGS. 4A-D (see reference number 474, FIGS. 4A-D). Calculation of the custom path 598 can be accomplished using Dijkstra's algorithm, or any other suitable method. Generally, the custom path 598 intersects with various path grid 596 points that do not intersect with any obstacles 590 (or other forbidden areas).) (Grodde: Fig. 5D; [Map showing determining a 4th angle with respect to an obstacle])
Regarding claim 20, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 19. Grodde further teaches:
wherein the determining the fourth angle comprises: obtaining first absolute positions of the first robot and the second robot based on 44 the sensor data for the second robot (Grodde: ¶ 082; GPS information of the trailer and the 3-D position sensors placed independently on the vehicle and the trailer (i.e., instead of solely using a single 2-D bend angle senor), the absolute positions of the vehicle and the trailer can be assessed and tracked in real-time by calculating orientation differences between the 3-D position sensors.) and the local map; (Grodde: ¶ 037; map data allows a driver to plot or navigate around objects and blind corners.) obtaining second absolute positions of the first robot and the second robot based on the movement data and the local map; and determining, based on the first absolute positions and the second absolute positions, the fourth angle. (Grodde: ¶ 130; process 600 comprises acquiring at 616 tracking data of the vehicle by utilizing the first 3-D position sensor, the second 3-D position sensor, and the global positioning system as the vehicle traverses from the starting position to the ending position along the custom path) (Grodde: Fig. 5D; [Map showing determining a 4th angle with respect to an obstacle])
Claims 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combination Grodde as applied to claims 2, 13 respectively above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US 20220135125 A1).
Regarding claim 3, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 2. To the extent Grodde is silent about or does not explicitly teach:
wherein the processor is further configured to output, based on the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle and the measured shape of the second robot not matching, a signal indicating an angle determination failure; Wang does teach:
wherein the processor is further configured to output, based on the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle and the measured shape of the second robot not matching, a signal indicating an angle determination failure. (Wang: ¶ 122; HMI device 42 notifies, based on the command, the driver, for example, by displaying a warning sentence, or turning on the lamp, that the coupling cannot be achieved through the coupling assistance provided by the four-wheel steering control.).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Wang with the teachings of Grodde because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of "increasing accuracy of coupling assistance through automatic steering control." (Wang: ¶ 007).
Regarding claim 14, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 13. To the extent Grodde is silent about or does not explicitly teach:
wherein the determining the first angle comprises: determining that the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle and the measured shape of the second robot do not match; and outputting, based on the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle and the measured shape of the second robot not matching, a signal indicating an angle determination failure; Wang does teach:
wherein the determining the first angle comprises: determining that the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle and the measured shape of the second robot do not match; and outputting, based on the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle and the measured shape of the second robot not matching, a signal indicating an angle determination failure. (Wang: ¶ 122; HMI device 42 notifies, based on the command, the driver, for example, by displaying a warning sentence, or turning on the lamp, that the coupling cannot be achieved through the coupling assistance provided by the four-wheel steering control.).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Wang with the teachings of Grodde because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of "increasing accuracy of coupling assistance through automatic steering control." (Wang: ¶ 007).
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combination Grodde as applied to claims 5, 15 respectively above, and further in view of Trombley (DE 102014222032 B4).
Regarding claim 6, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 5. To the extent Grodde is silent about or does not explicitly teach:
wherein the processor is further configured to output a Not Ready message based on the number of the depth data set being less than the threshold number of sets.; Trombley does teach:
A system that measures the distance to a tow hitch connection and provides an HMI message that the system is ready for use (Trombley: ¶¶ 62-63; The desired target placement zone can be determined by criteria such as the distance from the trailer hitch connection . . . If the target was detected by the processed recordings, the vehicle-trailer reversing assistant system sets in step 934 a warning message is ready for the user.).
Therefore, before the effective filling date of the claim invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would be taught wherein the determining the second angle comprises: outputting a Not Ready message based on a number of the depth data set being less than a threshold number of sets, and wherein the depth data set is collected for any initial angle because when Trombley’s teaching is combined with Katsuki’s previously applied teaching of a minimum threshold value of measurements before determining a distance to tow hitch connection (Katsuki: ¶ 054), the person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the only difference between the claimed limitation and the combined teaching is a matter of aesthetic design choice (MPEP § 2144.04(I)) in displaying “system ready” or “system not ready” and that Trombley would provide the predictable benefit of “facilitate maneuvering between a decoupled towing vehicle and a trailer.” (Trombley: ¶ 013).
Regarding claim 17, as detailed above, combination Grodde teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 15. To the extent Grodde is silent about or does not explicitly teach:
wherein the determining the second angle comprises: outputting a Not Ready message based on a number of the depth data set being less than a threshold number of sets, and wherein the depth data set is collected for any initial angle; Trombley does teach:
A system that measures the distance to a tow hitch connection and provides an HMI message that the system is ready for use (█Trombley: ¶¶ 62-63; The desired target placement zone can be determined by criteria such as the distance from the trailer hitch connection . . . If the target was detected by the processed recordings, the vehicle-trailer reversing assistant system sets in step 934 a warning message is ready for the user.).
Therefore, before the effective filling date of the claim invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would be taught wherein the determining the second angle comprises: outputting a Not Ready message based on a number of the depth data set being less than a threshold number of sets, and wherein the depth data set is collected for any initial angle because when Trombley’s teaching is combined with Katsuki’s previously applied teaching of a minimum threshold value of measurements before determining a distance to tow hitch connection (Katsuki: ¶ 054), the person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the only difference between the claimed limitation and the combined teaching is a matter of aesthetic design choice (MPEP § 2144.04(I)) in displaying “system ready” or “system not ready” and that Trombley would provide the predictable benefit of “facilitate maneuvering between a decoupled towing vehicle and a trailer.” (Trombley: ¶ 013).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks filed July 28. 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s argument and amendments with respect to the previous applied 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejection is persuasive and the rejection is hereby withdrawn. However, a new rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) has been applied.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant argues that
Grodde is silent about determining the first angle "based on the measured shape of the second robot and the reference shape of the second robot at the reference angle" as recited by claim 1. In addition, . . . Katsuki also fails to disclose or suggest determining a second angle "based on the rear view image" as recited by claim 1. Rather, Katsuki's sensor 20 operates as a ranging sensor that "measures the distance to a plurality of positions in the objects positioned in the upper surface area of the towed vehicle 3" (Katsuki, paragraph [0040]), and Katsuki's "measurement information acquisition unit 301 acquires information on the ranging distance to a plurality of measurement points and the ranging direction, by means of the sensor 20, as measurement information" (Katsuki, paragraph [0042]). Katsuki then derives its coupling angle from that ranging measurement information, for example, by clustering the measurement points (Katsuki, paragraph [0043], "performs clustering processing to recognize a set of measurement points whose distance from adjacent measurement points is less than a prescribed value, as a measurement point group related to one object") and extracting straight-line (Katsuki, paragraph [0044], "extracts information on the straight line portion") and corner geometry (Katsuki, paragraph [0044], "estimates a corner portion which is a corner of each of the target members 40-1 and 40-2"), rather than from any image. Even to the extent Katsuki states that its sensor 20 may be "a camera device" (Katsuki, paragraph [0040]), Katsuki does not process a rear view image as an image. Rather, Katsuki treats the sensor output as "ranging distance to a plurality of measurement points" (Katsuki, paragraph [0042]) and computes the coupling angle geometrically. Accordingly, Katsuki does not "determine, based on the rear view image, a second angle between the first robot and the second robot," as recited by claim 1. (Applicant’s Arguments filed July 28. 2026, pg. 12-13).
New art Ramirez et al (US 20190337343 A1) has been applied that explicitly teaches a camera-based system that generates a 3d point cloud from which it determines angles of at least the tow bar portion of a first vehicle and the body of a second vehicle. Ramirez: Fig. 4, Fig. 6A.
PNG
media_image2.png
345
529
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Applicant also argues:
present claim 1 requires that "a third angle between the first robot and the second robot" be determined based on two other angles (i.e., "first angle" and "second angle") that are also "between the first robot and the second robot." However, the Office Action relies on a single relative angle (i.e., "hitch angle") between the vehicle and the trailer for both the "first angle" of claim 1 and the "third angle" of claim 1 (Office Action, p. 5). Notably, the Office Action cites paragraphs [0048], [0137], and [0152]1 of Grodde for the "first angle" of claim 1 (Office Action, p. 5), but paragraphs [0048] and [0137] do not disclose or suggest any angle, much less an angle that is "between the first robot and the second robot" as claim 1 recites. (Applicant’s Arguments filed July 28. 2026, pg. 13-14).
New art Ramirez teaches a system in which the body angles of each of two vehicles (Ramirez: ¶ 043; detection module 164 determines the alignment direction of the trailer 200 relative to the tow vehicle 100 within the camera plane) are considered to determine an alignment (Ramirez: ¶ 043; direction of alignment) when calculating the steering angle to join the two vehicles (Ramirez: ¶ 033; determines a direction of alignment 220 for the tow vehicle 100 to be aligned with the trailer 200, such that the fore-aft axis Y of the tow vehicle 100 overlaps with a fort-aft axis Y of the trailer). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize calculating the steering angle with a direction of alignment includes the third claimed angle by way of basic trigonometry. Consequently, the teachings of Ramirez in combination with the teachings of Grodde and Katsuki would make obvious the limitations of the claims to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure Oh et al. (US 20220063720 A1) which discloses a vehicle trailer detection system includes a radar system and a controller receiving object point location data from the radar system at an increased sensitivity level, storing sequential first and second object point location data sets, and applying a rotational point set registration to the first and second object point location data sets to achieve a match between a subset of persistent point locations within the first and second object point location data sets to output an estimated rotation angle..
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 CHARLES PALL whose telephone number is (571)272-5280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 - 18:30.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at 571-272-1206. 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.
/C.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
