Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/967,213

Parking Robot Safety Device and Method

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 03, 2024
Examiner
CASS, JEAN PAUL
Art Unit
3666
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Sungshin Women'S University R&Db Foundation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
719 granted / 984 resolved
+21.1% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
83 currently pending
Career history
1067
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
§103
56.8%
+16.8% vs TC avg
§102
12.6%
-27.4% vs TC avg
§112
12.8%
-27.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 984 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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. 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. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent Application Pub. No.: US 20200180712 A1 to Ibenthal that was filed in 2018 and in view of German Patent Pub. No: DE102017220587B4 to Nordbruch that was filed in 2017 and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20100161128A1 to Choi filed in 2008. IBENTHAL discloses “...1. A system comprising: a parking robot configured to provide an unmanned parking service by moving one or more vehicles within a designated work area; (see paragraph 16-22 where four parking robots can provide a lifting of the vehicle to move the parked vehicle by raising the parked vehicle from the driving floor)”. IBENTHAL is silent but NORDBRUCH teaches “...a boundary sensor disposed in a boundary area separating the designated work area from an external area, wherein the boundary sensor is configured to detect an entry of an entity from the external area into the designated work area or an exit of the entity from the designated work area to the external area; (See robot sensors and also environmental sensors; In one embodiment, the parking space includes an environment sensor system. An environment sensor system includes one or more environment sensors that are spatially distributed within the parking lot and monitor their respective environment using sensors. The multiple environment sensors are, for example, identical or, for example, different. An environment sensor within the meaning of the description is, for example, one of the following environment sensors: video sensor, radar sensor, LiDAR sensor, ultrasonic sensor, magnetic field sensor and infrared sensor.) a monitoring sensor disposed in the designated work area and configured to monitor the entity in the designated work area; and one or more processors communicatively coupled, via a network, to the parking robot, the boundary sensor, and the monitoring sensor, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: (An environment sensor system includes one or more environment sensors that are spatially distributed within the parking lot and monitor their respective environment using sensors. The multiple environment sensors are, for example, identical or, for example, different. An environment sensor within the meaning of the description is, for example, one of the following environment sensors: video sensor, radar sensor, LiDAR sensor, ultrasonic sensor, magnetic field sensor and infrared sensor. According to one embodiment, the parking robot is controlled on the basis of surroundings sensor data from the surroundings sensors. The environment sensor data based on the respective detected environment. Moving the motor vehicle by means of the parking robot within the parking lot includes, for example, the parking robot transferring the motor vehicle from a starting position to a target position. A starting position is, for example, a parking position at which a driver of the motor vehicle parks his motor vehicle for automatic parking of the motor vehicle within the parking lot.)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of NORDBRUCH with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since NORDBRUCH teaches that a parking robot 201 and 401 can lift a motor vehicle and carry the vehicle to a parking space via a control device that lifts the vehicle from the axles 405, 407. The vehicle can move from the original location when initially parked to a long term parking space via a control device. The parking robot can also interface with one or more environmental sensors that is a lidar, radar and ultrasonic and magnetic field and infrared sensor. This can provide a collision avoidance and direction to move the vehicle into a multi-story garage so the user can drop the vehicle in front of the airport and then the robot can park the vehicle autonomously by lifting the axle on the 10th floor of a parking garage. See claims 1-3 and paragraph 1-10. The primary reference is silent but Choi teaches “..determine, via the monitoring sensor, an operation characteristic and a type of the entity; and control, based on a status of the parking robot and the type and the operation characteristic of the entity, an operation of the parking robot”. (See paragraph 46-56 and FIG. 6-7 where the parking robot can grab a vehicle and bring it for parking and then collect information and provide this information to the server or locally and then provide a collision avoidance protocol to direction and speed of the objects and also transmit this to the other posts) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent Application Pub. No.: US 20200180712 A1 to Ibenthal that was filed in 2018 and in view of German Patent Pub. No: DE102017220587B4 to Nordbruch that was filed in 2017 and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20100161128A1 to Choi filed in 2008 and in view of NPL, Lewis, John, A Comprehensive Guide to Light Curtains: Safety Applications and Emerging Trends, A3 (https://www.automate.org/industry-insights/a-comprehensive-guide-to-light-curtains-safety-applications-and-emerging-trends)(1-3-24) (hereinafter “Lewis”). The secondary reference discloses a IR sensor but is silent as to a light curtain. Lewis teaches “...2. The system of claim 1, wherein the boundary sensor comprises a safety light curtain”. (see paragraph 1-14 where crossing the safety curtain which is an IR device can provide an automatic stoppage of all vehicles and machines to provide safety considerations). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of LEWIS with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since LEWIS teaches that an IR sensor can provide a light curtain where the machines can all be shut down when a person cross the IR path. This can provide increased safety to prevent a collision with the machine and a body part. Claims 3 to 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent Application Pub. No.: US 20200180712 A1 to Ibenthal that was filed in 2018 and in view of German Patent Pub. No: DE102017220587B4 to Nordbruch that was filed in 2017 and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20100161128A1 to Choi filed in 2008. PNG media_image1.png 788 996 media_image1.png Greyscale Choi teaches “...3. The system of claim 1, wherein the designated work area comprises a staging area that is located between the boundary area and a parking area, wherein the parking area is not adjacent to the boundary area, and wherein the boundary sensor is configured to: detect the entity entering or exiting the staging area; and send, via the network, a notification indicating the entity entering or exiting the staging area”. (see claims 1-10 and FIG. 1 where the parking robots can take the vehicle and move the vehicle on the road that has one or more posts 500 before getting to the parking area, and the posts can provide a notification that are is an object and pedestrian and to avoid these or the robot can detect a person and provide the data to the posts for other vehicles and then move past this staging area to park the vehicle) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Nordbrusch teaches “...4. The system of claim 1, wherein the monitoring sensor comprises: a plurality of sensors disposed in the designated work area; and a computer vision-based artificial intelligence model configured to extract, from data received from the plurality of sensors, information associated with safety measures for the parking robot”. (In one embodiment, the parking space includes an environment sensor system. An environment sensor system includes one or more environment sensors that are spatially distributed within the parking lot and monitor their respective environment using sensors. The multiple environment sensors are, for example, identical or, for example, different. An environment sensor within the meaning of the description is, for example, one of the following environment sensors: video sensor, radar sensor, LiDAR sensor, ultrasonic sensor, magnetic field sensor and infrared sensor. According to one embodiment, the parking robot is controlled on the basis of surroundings sensor data from the surroundings sensors. The environment sensor data based on the respective detected environment. Moving the motor vehicle by means of the parking robot within the parking lot includes, for example, the parking robot transferring the motor vehicle from a starting position to a target position. A starting position is, for example, a parking position at which a driver of the motor vehicle parks his motor vehicle for automatic parking of the motor vehicle within the parking lot. The target position is, for example, a parking position at which the motor vehicle is to be parked. That means that according to this embodiment, the parking robot moves the motor vehicle from the parking position to the parking position and parks it there.) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of NORDBRUCH with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since NORDBRUCH teaches that a parking robot 201 and 401 can lift a motor vehicle and carry the vehicle to a parking space via a control device that lifts the vehicle from the axles 405, 407. The vehicle can move from the original location when initially parked to a long term parking space via a control device. The parking robot can also interface with one or more environmental sensors that is a lidar, radar and ultrasonic and magnetic field and infrared sensor. This can provide a collision avoidance and direction to move the vehicle into a multi-story garage so the user can drop the vehicle in front of the airport and then the robot can park the vehicle autonomously by lifting the axle on the 10th floor of a parking garage. See claims 1-3 and paragraph 1-10. Choi teaches “...5. The system of claim 4, wherein the computer vision-based artificial intelligence model is further configured to: determine the type of the entity by categorizing the entity as one of a person, a vehicle, a robot, or a miscellaneous object; and determine the operation characteristic based on the type of the entity. (see paragraph 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Choi teaches “...6. The system of claim 5, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: determine, based on the operation characteristic, a risk level indicating a likelihood of an accident between the entity and the parking robot, wherein the operation characteristic comprises at least one of: a size of the entity or a speed of the entity; and control, based on the risk level, the operation of the parking robot to remain stationary or avoid the entity”. (see paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Nordbrusch teaches “..7. The system of claim 1, wherein: the monitoring sensor comprises at least one of: a red-green-blue (RGB) camera, a thermal imaging camera, a lidar, or a radar”. (In one embodiment, the parking space includes an environment sensor system. An environment sensor system includes one or more environment sensors that are spatially distributed within the parking lot and monitor their respective environment using sensors. The multiple environment sensors are, for example, identical or, for example, different. An environment sensor within the meaning of the description is, for example, one of the following environment sensors: video sensor, radar sensor, LiDAR sensor, ultrasonic sensor, magnetic field sensor and infrared sensor. According to one embodiment, the parking robot is controlled on the basis of surroundings sensor data from the surroundings sensors. The environment sensor data based on the respective detected environment. Moving the motor vehicle by means of the parking robot within the parking lot includes, for example, the parking robot transferring the motor vehicle from a starting position to a target position. A starting position is, for example, a parking position at which a driver of the motor vehicle parks his motor vehicle for automatic parking of the motor vehicle within the parking lot. The target position is, for example, a parking position at which the motor vehicle is to be parked. That means that according to this embodiment, the parking robot moves the motor vehicle from the parking position to the parking position and parks it there.) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of NORDBRUCH with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since NORDBRUCH teaches that a parking robot 201 and 401 can lift a motor vehicle and carry the vehicle to a parking space via a control device that lifts the vehicle from the axles 405, 407. The vehicle can move from the original location when initially parked to a long term parking space via a control device. The parking robot can also interface with one or more environmental sensors that is a lidar, radar and ultrasonic and magnetic field and infrared sensor. This can provide a collision avoidance and direction to move the vehicle into a multi-story garage so the user can drop the vehicle in front of the airport and then the robot can park the vehicle autonomously by lifting the axle on the 10th floor of a parking garage. See claims 1-3 and paragraph 1-10. PNG media_image2.png 818 638 media_image2.png Greyscale Choi teaches “...8. The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to control the operation of the parking robot by: determining, within the designated work area, a specific area that is adjacent to the boundary area; and”. (see claims 1-10 and FIG. 1 and 6 where the parking robots can take the vehicle and move the vehicle on the road that has one or more posts 500 before getting to the parking area, and the posts can provide a notification that are is an object and pedestrian and to avoid these or the robot can detect a person and provide the data to the posts for other vehicles and then move past this staging area to park the vehicle) controlling, based on detecting the entity via the boundary sensor or the monitoring sensor, the operation of the parking robot to avoid the parking robot and the entity being located simultaneously in the specific area. . (see blocks 602-610 and paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Choi teaches “...9. The system of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors are configured to control the operation of the parking robot by, based on the entity being a first vehicle, one of: controlling, based on the entity being in the specific area, the operation of the parking robot to keep at least a predetermined distance away from the specific area and execute a work assigned to the parking robot; or controlling, based on the entity being outside the specific area, the operation of the parking robot to unload a second vehicle that is loaded on the parking robot and move the second vehicle to a waiting area outside the specific area. (see claims 1-10 and FIG. 1 and 6 where the parking robots can take the vehicle and move the vehicle on the road that has one or more posts 500 before getting to the parking area, and the posts can provide a notification that are is an object and pedestrian and to avoid these or the robot can detect a person and provide the data to the posts for other vehicles and then move past this staging area to park the vehicle) (see blocks 602-610 and paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Choi teaches “...10. The system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: designate the specific area as a staging area where the parking robot loads or unloads one or more vehicles within the designated work area. (see claims 1-10 and FIG. 1 and 6 where the parking robots can take the vehicle and move the vehicle on the road that has one or more posts 500 before getting to the parking area, and the posts can provide a notification that are is an object and pedestrian and to avoid these or the robot can detect a person and provide the data to the posts for other vehicles and then move past this staging area to park the vehicle) (see blocks 602-610 and paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of IBENTHAL with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of German Patent Pub. No: DE102017220587B4 to Nordbruch that was filed in 2017 and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20100161128A1 to Choi filed in 2008. NORDBRUCH discloses “... 11. A method performed by an apparatus, the method comprising: detecting, via a boundary sensor, an entry of an entity into a designated work area, in which a robot is operating, wherein one or more vehicles are moved based on a moving path of the robot within the designated work area; determining, via a monitoring sensor, an operation characteristic of the entity in the designated work area;” (See robot sensors and also environmental sensors; In one embodiment, the parking space includes an environment sensor system. An environment sensor system includes one or more environment sensors that are spatially distributed within the parking lot and monitor their respective environment using sensors. The multiple environment sensors are, for example, identical or, for example, different. An environment sensor within the meaning of the description is, for example, one of the following environment sensors: video sensor, radar sensor, LiDAR sensor, ultrasonic sensor, magnetic field sensor and infrared sensor.) Choi teaches “...determining, based on a status of the robot and the operation characteristic of the entity, a risk level indicating a likelihood of an accident within the designated work area; and controlling, based on the risk level, an operation of the robot to execute a safety measure”. (see paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of NORDBRUCH with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. PNG media_image1.png 788 996 media_image1.png Greyscale Choi teaches “...12. The method of claim 11, wherein the detecting of the entry of the entity comprises: detecting the entity entering a staging area that is located between a boundary area and a parking area, and wherein the boundary sensor is disposed in the boundary area and configured to send, via a network, a notification indicating the entity entering the staging area. (see claims 1-10 and FIG. 1 where the parking robots can take the vehicle and move the vehicle on the road that has one or more posts 500 before getting to the parking area, and the posts can provide a notification that are is an object and pedestrian and to avoid these or the robot can detect a person and provide the data to the posts for other vehicles and then move past this staging area to park the vehicle) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of NORDBRUCH with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Nordbruch discloses “...13. The method of claim 11, wherein the determining of the operation characteristic of the entity comprises: monitoring, via the monitoring sensor, the designated work area, wherein the monitoring sensor comprises at least one of red-green-blue (RGB) camera, a thermal imaging camera, a lidar, or a radar; and determining, based on applying a computer vision-based ai1ificial intelligence model to data input received from the monitoring sensor, the operation characteristic of the entity. ”. (In one embodiment, the parking space includes an environment sensor system. An environment sensor system includes one or more environment sensors that are spatially distributed within the parking lot and monitor their respective environment using sensors. The multiple environment sensors are, for example, identical or, for example, different. An environment sensor within the meaning of the description is, for example, one of the following environment sensors: video sensor, radar sensor, LiDAR sensor, ultrasonic sensor, magnetic field sensor and infrared sensor. According to one embodiment, the parking robot is controlled on the basis of surroundings sensor data from the surroundings sensors. The environment sensor data based on the respective detected environment. Moving the motor vehicle by means of the parking robot within the parking lot includes, for example, the parking robot transferring the motor vehicle from a starting position to a target position. A starting position is, for example, a parking position at which a driver of the motor vehicle parks his motor vehicle for automatic parking of the motor vehicle within the parking lot. The target position is, for example, a parking position at which the motor vehicle is to be parked. That means that according to this embodiment, the parking robot moves the motor vehicle from the parking position to the parking position and parks it there.) Choi teaches “....14. The method of claim 13, wherein the determining of the risk level comp1ises: determining a position of the robot and a path of the robot; and determining, based on the operation characteristic and based on the position and (see Fig. 6, 602-610) the path of the robot, a possibility of a collision between the robot and the entity, wherein the operation characteristic comprises at least one of a type of the entity, a size of the entity, a speed of the entity, or a distance of the entity to the robot. (see paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of NORDBRUCH with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Choi teaches “...15. The method of claim 11, wherein the controlling of the operation of the robot comprises, based on the entity being a person, one of: controlling, based on a distance between the entity and the robot being less than a threshold distance, the operation of the robot to stop within a threshold time; or (see paragraph 39 where if a pedestrian is detected the parking robot can stop and see paragraph 40-46 where a speed or direction can be corrected or a detour before hitting a pedestrian) controlling, based on the distance being greater than the threshold distance, the operation of the robot to stop at a time that the entity is estimated, based on the operation characteristic of the entity, to be within the threshold distance away from the robot. (see paragraph 39, 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of NORDBRUCH with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Choi teaches “...16. The method of claim 11, wherein the determining of the risk level comp1ises: determining, based on the entity being not detected in a specific area within the designated work area, whether the robot is transporting a vehicle, and wherein the specific area is adjacent to a boundary area. (see paragraph 39 where if no pedestrian is detected the robot moves from the road and keeps within the boundaries while monitoring the posts and then moves to the parking space to park the vehicles and see paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of NORDBRUCH with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Choi teaches “...17. The method of claim 16, wherein the controlling of the operation of the robot comprises one of: controlling, based on the robot transporting the vehicle, the operation of the robot to stop; (see paragraph 39) or controlling, based on the robot not transporting the vehicle, the operation of the robot to move to a waiting area. . (see paragraph 39 where if no pedestrian is detected the robot moves from the road and keeps within the boundaries while monitoring the posts and then moves to the parking space to park the vehicles and see paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person and see paragraph 41 where when done with the parking the robot returns to the original path)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of NORDBRUCH with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Choi teaches “...18. The method of claim 11, wherein the controlling of the operation of the robot comprises: controlling the operation of the robot to avoid the robot and the entity being located simultaneously in a specific area within the designated work area”. (see paragraph 39 where if no pedestrian is detected the robot moves from the road and keeps within the boundaries while monitoring the posts and then moves to the parking space to park the vehicles and see paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person and see paragraph 41 where when done with the parking the robot returns to the original path)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of NORDBRUCH with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Choi teaches “...19. The method of claim 18, wherein the controlling of the operation of the robot further comprises, based on the entity being a first vehicle and the entity being detected in the specific area, one of: (see paragraph 37 where multiple parking robots are used) controlling, based on the entity being in the specific area, the operation of the robot to keep at least a predetermined distance away from the specific area and execute a work assigned to the robot; or controlling, based on the entity being outside the specific area, the operation of the robot to unload a second vehicle that is loaded on the robot and move the second vehicle to a waiting area outside the specific area” (see paragraph 39 where if no pedestrian is detected the robot moves from the road and keeps within the boundaries while monitoring the posts and then moves to the parking space to park the vehicles and see paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person and see paragraph 41 where when done with the parking the robot returns to the original path to park another car )”.. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of NORDBRUCH with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Choi teaches “..20. The method of claim 19, wherein the specific area is located within the designated work area and between a parking area and an external area, and wherein the specific area is a staging area where the robot loads or unloads one or more vehicles. (see paragraph 8 where the first area is where the user loads the vehicle on the robot and see paragraph 26 where the user can specific parking areas and see paragraph 39 where if no pedestrian is detected the robot moves from the road and keeps within the boundaries while monitoring the posts and then moves to the parking space to park the vehicles and see paragraph 67, 34-44 where the robots can detect a pedestrian and then alert all other posts to provide a notification to other parking robots and correct the speed and heading to avoid this person and a risk level can be determined and a method of reducing the risk by avoiding can be taken for all robots to avoid hitting a person and see paragraph 41 where when done with the parking the robot returns to the original path)”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CHOI with the disclosure of NORDBRUCH with a reasonable expectation of success since CHOI teaches that a parking robot can communicate with roadside posts that are on the boundary of the lanes or in the road itself. The posts can provide notifications from other robots to other robots or from a server. The parking robot can use a sensor to determine a collision avoidance protocol. See blocks 602-610. A pedestrian may walk in front of the parking robot. The parking robot can then stop or slow or change a position to avoid running over the pedestrian. Then the parking robot can communicate via a wireless signal to the post antennas and this information can be shared to the other 10 robots that are also parking cars. This can provide a robust collision avoidance strategy. See paragraph 8-11 and 34-42 and claims 1-10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN PAUL CASS whose telephone number is (571)270-1934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7 am to 7 pm; Saturday 10 am to 12 noon. 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, Scott A. Browne can be reached at 571-270-0151. 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. /JEAN PAUL CASS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 03, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593752
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING HARVESTING IMPLEMENT OPERATION OF AN AGRICULTURAL HARVESTER BASED ON TILT ACTUATOR FORCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596986
GLOBAL ADDRESS SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590801
REAL TIME DETERMINATION OF PEDESTRIAN DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583572
MARINE VESSEL AND MARINE VESSEL PROPULSION CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571183
EXCAVATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.9%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 984 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month