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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CN 202323384702.8, filed on 12/11/2023.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: Handling Device with a Mounted Laser Radar for Point Cloud Data Collection
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
The recited limitation “anti-fall function” in claim 20 on lines 6 and 7 does not have significant meaning within the art. Thus, the limitation is being interpreted based on the specification as “bypassing a travel road surface on which there is no point cloud data”. If this is not the proper interpretation, the claim language needs to be adjusted.
The recited limitation “end safety protection” in claim 20 on line 9 does not have significant meaning within the art. Thus, the limitation is being interpreted based on the specification as “avoiding collision of an at least one fork end with a to-be-handled object”. If this is not the proper interpretation, the claim language needs to be adjusted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11 and 16 are 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.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the third included angle" on line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. While claim 10 introduces a third included angle, claim 11 is not dependent on claim 10. Thus, the claim is rendered indefinite.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the fourth included angle" on lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. While claim 14 introduces a fourth included angle, claim 16 is not dependent on claim 14. Thus, the claim is rendered indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Melchior et al. (US 20240150159), hereinafter Melchior.
Regarding claim 1, Melchior teaches
A handling device, comprising (Paragraph 0085, an example of a self-driving or robotic vehicle in the form of an AMR lift truck 100 that is equipped and configured to drop off and pick up objects):
a device body (Figure 1, AMR lift truck 100; Paragraph 0085, AMR lift truck 100 that is equipped and configured to drop off and pick up objects);
a fork assembly movably disposed on the device body and configured to pick up a to-be-handled object (Figure 2, carriage 114; Paragraph 0087, Forks 110 may be supported by one or more robotically controlled actuators coupled to a carriage 114 that enable AMR 100 to raise and lower, side-shift, and extend and retract to pick up and drop off objects in the form of payloads);
a three-dimensional, 3D, laser radar on the fork assembly (Figure 2, sensors 156, 158, and 165; Paragraph 0094, AMR 100 includes three particular sensors 156, 158, and 165 (which may be among the sensors 150); Paragraph 0096, In some embodiments, object of interest detection sensor 156 may perform 3D LiDAR operations),
and configured to collect 3D point cloud data of the to-be-handled object (Paragraph 0108, at least one sensor 150 configured to collect/acquire point cloud data, such as a LiDAR scanner or 3D camera);
a camera on the fork assembly (Figure 2, sensors 156, 158, and 165; Paragraph 0094, AMR 100 includes three particular sensors 156, 158, and 165 (which may be among the sensors 150); Paragraph 0097, Object of interest classification sensor 165 may include a camera or the like to verify that the object being detected is a payload)
and configured to collect image data of the to-be-handled object (Paragraph 0097, Object of interest classification sensor 165 may include a camera or the like to verify that the object being detected is a payload);
and a controller communicated with the 3D laser radar, the camera and the fork assembly respectively (Paragraph 0107, payload engagement module 185 can process sensor data from one or more of the sensors 150),
and configured to respectively determine, based on the 3D point cloud data and the image data, pose information and a fork insertion position of the to-be-handled object to control the fork assembly to move, so as to enable the fork assembly to align with the fork insertion position of the to-be-handled object (Paragraph 0107, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to robotically control carriage 114 to pick and drop payloads. In some embodiments, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to control and/or adjust position and orientation of the load engagement portion of AMR 110, e.g., forks 110 and/or carriage 114. These adjustments can be based on, at least on part, a pose of the object to be picked).
Regarding claim 20, in addition to the teachings above for claim 1, Melchior further teaches
wherein, in response to that the 3D laser radar is at a first position, the controller is configured to respectively determine, based on the 3D point cloud data and the image data, the pose information and the fork insertion position of the to-be-handled object to control at least one fork of the fork assembly to move, so as to make the fork assembly to move to the fork insertion position of the to-be-handled object (Paragraph 0107, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to robotically control carriage 114 to pick and drop payloads. In some embodiments, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to control and/or adjust position and orientation of the load engagement portion of AMR 110, e.g., forks 110 and/or carriage 114. These adjustments can be based on, at least on part, a pose of the object to be picked),
and control the handling device to perform anti-fall function (Paragraph 0106, For example, if safety sensors detect objects in the path as a safety hazard, such sensor data can be used to cause the drive control subsystem 120 to stop the vehicle to avoid the hazard; It is implied that the drive control subsystem can likewise avoid areas not mapped by treating them as a safety hazard);
and in response to that the 3D laser radar is at a second position, the controller is configured to perform, based on the 3D point cloud data and the image data, an end safety protection of the at least one fork of the fork assembly and a horizontal in-place detection of the to-be-handled object (Paragraph 0107, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to control and/or adjust position and orientation of the load engagement portion of AMR 110, e.g., forks 110 and/or carriage 114. These adjustments can be based on, at least on part, a pose of the object to be picked; It is implied that, because the forks are adjusted based on pose information, the system can stop the AMR if the forks fail to meet the pose information).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2-3, 9-10, 13, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melchior (US 20240150159).
Regarding claim 2, in addition to the teachings above for claim 1, Melchior further teaches
wherein the fork insertion position of the to-be-handled object has at least one insertion hole (Paragraph 0097, one or more sensors can communicate with the payload engagement system (see FIG. 3) to determine both if the object is one that can be acquired by forks 110 of AMR 100, and the pose of that object relative to AMR 100; It is implied that the for an object to be acquired by the forks it must have an insertion hole);
the fork assembly comprises a movable component and at least one fork connected to the movable component (Figure 2, carriage 114 and forks 110; Paragraph 0087, Forks 110 may be supported by one or more robotically controlled actuators coupled to a carriage 114 that enable AMR 100 to raise and lower, side-shift, and extend and retract to pick up and drop off objects in the form of payloads);
the movable component is movably disposed on the device body and communicated with the controller, and is configured to drive the at least one fork to move relative to the device body (Paragraph 0107, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to control and/or adjust position and orientation of the load engagement portion of AMR 110, e.g., forks 110 and/or carriage 114);
the at least one fork is configured to be inserted into the at least one insertion hole (Paragraph 107, These adjustments can be based on, at least on part, a pose of the object to be picked);
and the 3D laser radar and the camera are both on the movable component (Figure 2, see carriage 114 and sensors 156 and 165; Paragraph 0096, sensor 156 can be coupled to carriage 114 or other movable portion of AMR 100 so that sensor 156 moves with the forks)
and the 3D laser radar is below the at least one fork in a vertical direction (Figure 2, see carriage 114 and sensor 156).
Melchior fails to fully teach wherein the camera is below the at least one fork in a vertical direction. However, Melchior does teach wherein the camera is above the at least one fork in a vertical direction (Figure 2, see carriage 114 and sensor 165). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to identify a finite number of predictable solutions for the location of the sensors on the carriage relative to the forks. These finite, predictable solutions include:
Above the forks
In line with the forks
Below the forks
Two of these options, below and above, are already present with sensors 156 and 165, respectively. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to identify and try these finite, predictable solutions with a reasonable chance of success for each sensor type. The results would have been predictable. For more information regarding this rationale, see MPEP2143(I)(E).
Regarding claim 3, in addition to the teaching above for claim 2, Melchior further teaches
wherein a scanning region of the 3D laser radar comprises a first region corresponding to a travel road surface ahead of a front end of the handling device (Paragraph 0100, a map of the environment stored in memory and, optionally, updated from time-to-time, e.g., in real-time, from vehicle sensor data collected in real-time as AMR 100 navigates and/or performs its tasks);
the controller is further configured to determine, based on the 3D point cloud data, whether a suspended position is present in the first region (Paragraph 0106, For example, if safety sensors detect objects in the path as a safety hazard, such sensor data can be used to cause the drive control subsystem 120 to stop the vehicle to avoid the hazard; It is implied that a suspended position can be detected as an object in the path),
wherein the first region is a road surface region in a region where an end of the device body connected with the movable component is located (Paragraph 0100, a map of the environment stored in memory and, optionally, updated from time-to-time, e.g., in real-time, from vehicle sensor data collected in real-time as AMR 100 navigates and/or performs its tasks).
Regarding claim 9, in addition to the teachings above for claim 2, Melchior further teaches
wherein there are two forks disposed in a spacing on the movable component (Figure 2, see forks 110),
and the 3D laser radar and the camera are between the two forks and are arranged along the vertical direction (Figure 2, see forks 110 and sensors 156 and 165).
Regarding claim 10, in addition to the teachings above for claim 2, Melchior further teaches
wherein, the movable component comprises a rotator (Paragraph 0087, the AMR may be configured to robotically control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of forks 110 to pick a palletized load in view of the pose of the load and/or horizontal surface that supports the load; It is implied that, because the AMR can control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of the forks, there exists a rotator to do these functions)
and/or a raising and lowering component, the raising and lowering component is movably disposed on the device body and is movable relative to the device body in the vertical direction (Figure 2, carriage 114; Paragraph 0087, Forks 110 may be supported by one or more robotically controlled actuators coupled to a carriage 114 that enable AMR 100 to raise and lower, side-shift, and extend and retract to pick up and drop off objects in the form of payloads),
and the rotator is rotatably connected to the raising and lowering component (Paragraph 0087, the AMR may be configured to robotically control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of forks 110 to pick a palletized load in view of the pose of the load and/or horizontal surface that supports the load; It is implied that, because the forks can be controlled with yaw, pitch, and/or roll, and the forks are located on the carriage, then the rotator system is likewise on the carriage),
wherein the 3D laser radar and the camera are both on the raising and lowering component (Figure 2, see sensors 156 and 165; Paragraph 0096, sensor 156 can be coupled to carriage 114 or other movable portion of AMR 100 so that sensor 156 moves with the forks),
the at least one fork comprises two forks (Figure 2, see fork 110 and carriage 114; Paragraph 0087, Forks 110 may be supported by one or more robotically controlled actuators coupled to a carriage 114),
the two forks are on the rotator, and the two forks are driven by the rotator to rotate (Paragraph 0087, the AMR may be configured to robotically control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of forks 110 to pick a palletized load in view of the pose of the load and/or horizontal surface that supports the load; It is implied that, because the AMR can control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of the forks, there exists a rotator to do these functions);
the controller is communicated with the rotator and the raising and lowering component, and the controller is configured to determine, based on the 3D point cloud data and the image data, a height position of the at least one insertion hole of the to-be-handled object in the vertical direction, and control the raising and lowering component to move relative to the device body in the vertical direction, so as to drive the two forks to move in the vertical direction to the height position of the at least one insertion hole (Paragraph 0107, payload engagement module 185 can process sensor data from one or more of the sensors 150, in particular, object of interest detection sensor 156, load presence sensor 158, and object of interest classification sensor 165 and generate signals to control one or more actuators that control AMR 100. For example, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to robotically control carriage 114 to pick and drop payloads; Paragraph 0087, the AMR may be configured to robotically control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of forks 110 to pick a palletized load in view of the pose of the load and/or horizontal surface that supports the load),
and/or, the controller is configured to determine, based on the 3D point cloud data, a third included angle between a placement direction of the to-be-handled object and an upper surface of the two forks, and control, based on the third included angle, the rotator to rotate, and to drive the two forks to rotate, so as to make the third included angle between the upper surface of the two forks and the placement direction to be less than or equal to a preset angle; the placement direction of the to-be-handled object is parallel to a contact surface between the to-be-handled object and the two forks and perpendicular to a fork insertion direction of the at least one insertion hole (Paragraph 0107, payload engagement module 185 can process sensor data from one or more of the sensors 150, in particular, object of interest detection sensor 156, load presence sensor 158, and object of interest classification sensor 165 and generate signals to control one or more actuators that control AMR 100. For example, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to robotically control carriage 114 to pick and drop payloads; Paragraph 0087, the AMR may be configured to robotically control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of forks 110 to pick a palletized load in view of the pose of the load and/or horizontal surface that supports the load).
Regarding claim 13, in addition to the teachings above for claim 2, Melchior further teaches
wherein the device body comprises a body part (Figure 1, AMR lift truck 100; Paragraph 0085, AMR lift truck 100 that is equipped and configured to drop off and pick up objects)
and a gantry movably disposed on the body part (Figure 1, see actuators coupled to carriage 114; AMR lift truck 100; Paragraph 0087, Forks 110 may be supported by one or more robotically controlled actuators coupled to a carriage 114 that enable AMR 100 to raise and lower, side-shift, and extend and retract to pick up and drop off objects),
and the fork assembly is movably disposed on the gantry (Figure 1, see actuators coupled to carriage 114 and carriage 114; AMR lift truck 100; Paragraph 0087, Forks 110 may be supported by one or more robotically controlled actuators coupled to a carriage 114);
and the controller is communicated with the gantry (Paragraph 0107, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to robotically control carriage 114 to pick and drop payloads. In some embodiments, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to control and/or adjust position and orientation of the load engagement portion of AMR 110, e.g., forks 110 and/or carriage 114. These adjustments can be based on, at least on part, a pose of the object to be picked),
and the controller is configured to determine, based on the 3D point cloud data, a second included angle between a fork insertion direction of the at least one insertion hole of the to-be-handled object and a horizontal plane, and control the gantry to move, such that an included angle between a length direction of the at least one fork and the horizontal plane is consistent with the second included angle (Paragraph 0087, the AMR may be configured to robotically control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of forks 110 to pick a palletized load in view of the pose of the load and/or horizontal surface that supports the load. In various embodiments, the AMR may be configured to robotically control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of forks 110 to pick a palletized load in view of the pose of the horizontal surface that is to receive the load. Paragraph 0107, In some embodiments, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to control and/or adjust position and orientation of the load engagement portion of AMR 110, e.g., forks 110 and/or carriage 114. These adjustments can be based on, at least on part, a pose of the object to be picked; It is implied that, because the AMR can control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of the forks based on the pose of the object, one of the determinations made can be an angle present between the object and horizontal plane which is included in the pose information).
Regarding claim 19, in addition to the teachings above for claim 2, Melchior further teaches
wherein the movable component comprises a rotary table configured to drive the at least one fork to rotate around an axis of the rotary table (Paragraph 0087, the AMR may be configured to robotically control the yaw, pitch, and/or roll of forks 110 to pick a palletized load in view of the pose of the load and/or horizontal surface that supports the load; It is implied that, because the AMR can control the roll of the forks, there exists a rotator to do these functions).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melchior (US 20240150159) in view of Xie et al. (CN 215516523), hereinafter Xie. A machine translation of Xie’s description from PE2E Search with added paragraph numbers is provided with this office action and is the translation used for reference.
Regarding claim 6, in addition to the teaching above for claim 2, Melchior further teaches
a raising and lowering component; wherein the raising and lowering component is movably disposed on the device body and movable relative to the device body in the vertical direction (Figure 2, carriage 114; Paragraph 0087, Forks 110 may be supported by one or more robotically controlled actuators coupled to a carriage 114 that enable AMR 100 to raise and lower, side-shift, and extend and retract to pick up and drop off objects in the form of payloads),
the 3D laser radar and the camera are both on the raising and lowering component (Figure 2, see sensors 156 and 165; Paragraph 0096, sensor 156 can be coupled to carriage 114 or other movable portion of AMR 100 so that sensor 156 moves with the forks),
the controller is communicated with the raising and lowering component (Paragraph 0087, Forks 110 may be supported by one or more robotically controlled actuators coupled to a carriage 114 that enable AMR 100 to raise and lower, side-shift, and extend and retract to pick up and drop off objects),
the controller is configured to determine, based on the 3D point cloud data and the image data, a height position of the at least one insertion hole of the to-be-handled object in the vertical direction (Paragraph 0107, payload engagement module 185 can process sensor data from one or more of the sensors 150, in particular, object of interest detection sensor 156, load presence sensor 158, and object of interest classification sensor 165 and generate signals to control one or more actuators that control AMR 100. For example, payload engagement module 185 can be configured to robotically control carriage 114 to pick and drop payloads),
and control the raising and lowering component to move relative to the device body in the vertical direction, so as to drive the at least one fork to move in the vertical direction to the height position of the at least one insertion hole (Paragraph 0087, Forks 110 may be supported by one or more robotically controlled actuators coupled to a carriage 114 that enable AMR 100 to raise and lower, side-shift, and extend and retract to pick up and drop off objects in the form of payloads).
Melchior fails to fully teach wherein the movable component comprises a lateral movable component and the lateral movable component is on the raising and lowering component; the at least one fork is on the lateral movable component, and the at least one fork is driven by the lateral movable component to move in a width direction of the device body; and the controller is communicated with the lateral movable component and the controller is further configured to control the lateral movable component to drive the at least one fork to move in the width direction, and determine, based on the 3D point cloud data, a movement distance of the at least one fork in the width direction.
However, Xie teaches
wherein the movable component comprises a lateral movable component (Figure 2, guide rod 6 and servo motor 9; Paragraph 0053, two laser radar 8 respectively detecting the distance between the two side edges of the tray and the fork 3, when the distance is not consistent, controlling the servo motor 9 to drive the threaded rod 10 to rotate, the fork 3 moves along the guide rod 6 under the thread fit of the lug boss 7 and the threaded rod 10, so as to adjust the distance between the two forks 3)
and the lateral movable component is on the raising and lowering component (Figure 1, see lifting frame 5 and guide rod 6);
the at least one fork is on the lateral movable component (Figure 2, guide rod 6 and servo motor 9; Paragraph 0053, the fork 3 moves along the guide rod 6 under the thread fit of the lug boss 7 and the threaded rod 10, so as to adjust the distance between the two forks 3),
and the at least one fork is driven by the lateral movable component to move in a width direction of the device body (Figure 2, see guide rod 6, servo motor 9, and fork 3; Paragraph 0053, two laser radar 8 respectively detecting the distance between the two side edges of the tray and the fork 3, when the distance is not consistent, controlling the servo motor 9 to drive the threaded rod 10 to rotate, the fork 3 moves along the guide rod 6 under the thread fit of the lug boss 7 and the threaded rod 10, so as to adjust the distance between the two forks 3);
and the controller is communicated with the lateral movable component (Paragraph 0052, one end of the threaded rod 10 is in transmission connection with the output shaft of the servo motor 9, the laser radar 8 located at the same side of the fork 3 is connected with the servo motor 9 control)
and the controller is further configured to control the lateral movable component to drive the at least one fork to move in the width direction, and determine, based on the 3D point cloud data, a movement distance of the at least one fork in the width direction (Paragraph 53, two laser radar 8 respectively detecting the distance between the two side edges of the tray and the fork 3, when the distance is not consistent, controlling the servo motor 9 to drive the threaded rod 10 to rotate, the fork 3 moves along the guide rod 6 under the thread fit of the lug boss 7 and the threaded rod 10, so as to adjust the distance between the two forks 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a lateral moving component with at least one fork and controlled by a controller to adjust a fork in a width direction, as taught by Xie, to the raising and lowering component of Melchior. One would be motivated to make this combination to improve the working efficiency of the system (Xie Paragraph 0009, The purpose of the utility model is to provide an omni-directional moving forklift capable of intelligently aligning and locating, which can replace manual automatic alignment locating work before loading goods, improving the working efficiency, reducing the risk of goods side tipping caused by the inaccuracy of butt joint).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have had the capability to combine these systems and would have recognized that the combination would yield predictable results. Furthermore, each element in the combined context would perform the same function they did separately.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Xie to Melchior because they are in the same field of endeavor directed to the same technology (forklifts), which would prompt its use based on design improvements that are predictable and recognized by one having ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 14 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melchior (US 20240150159) in view of Pappi et al. (US 20220002126), hereinafter Pappi.
Regarding claim 14, Melchior teaches for claim 13 as seen above.
Melchior fails to fully teach wherein the handling device further comprises an angle detector on the gantry, wherein the angle detector is communicated with the controller, and the angle detector is configured to detect a fourth included angle between the gantry and the vertical direction, and the controller is configured to determine the fourth included angle by the angle detector to determine whether the gantry is tilted to be in place.
However, Pappi teaches
wherein the handling device further comprises an angle detector on the gantry (Paragraph 0051, a tilt angle sensor 22 (FIG. 2) for detecting the tilt angle β (shown in FIG. 1) of the mast 12 with respect to the chassis 11),
wherein the angle detector is communicated with the controller (Paragraph 0051, a tilt angle sensor 22 (FIG. 2) for detecting the tilt angle β (shown in FIG. 1) of the mast 12 with respect to the chassis 11 and to output to the control unit 20 tilt angle information indicating the detected tilt angle),
and the angle detector is configured to detect a fourth included angle between the gantry and the vertical direction (Figure 1, see tilt angle β; Paragraph 0051, a tilt angle sensor 22 (FIG. 2) for detecting the tilt angle β (shown in FIG. 1) of the mast 12 with respect to the chassis 11),
and the controller is configured to determine the fourth included angle by the angle detector to determine whether the gantry is tilted to be in place (Paragraph 0057 and 0059, the control unit 20 may be configured ... to control the tilting actuator 31 by limiting the tilt angle β below a maximum allowed forward tilt angle βmax,f of the mast based on the inclination information, the load information and the height information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine an angle detector, as taught by Pappi, to the gantry of Melchior. One would be motivated to make this combination to help achieve stability of the system (Pappi paragraph 0006, a control unit configured to control the plurality of actuating units based on information detected by the plurality of sensors for achieving stability of the industrial truck during operation).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have had the capability to combine these systems and would have recognized that the combination would yield predictable results. Furthermore, each element in the combined context would perform the same function they did separately.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Pappi to Melchior because they are in the same field of endeavor directed to the same technology (forklifts), which would prompt its use based on design improvements that are predictable and recognized by one having ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 16, as best understood based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issue identified above, in addition to the teachings above for claim 13, Melchior further teaches
wherein the gantry comprises a gantry body (Figure 1, see actuators coupled to carriage 114; AMR lift truck 100; Paragraph 0087, Forks 110 may be supported by one or more robotically controlled actuators coupled to a carriage 114 that enable AMR 100 to raise and lower, side-shift, and extend and retract to pick up and drop off objects).
Melchior fails to fully teach wherein the gantry has a gantry tilt driving component; the gantry body is hinged to the body part; one end of the gantry tilt driving component is connected with the body part, and the other end of the gantry tilt driving component is connected with the gantry body; the gantry tilt driving component is further communicated with the controller, and the controller is further configured to indicate the gantry tilt driving component to drive the gantry body to move, so as to adjust the fourth included angle between the gantry body and the vertical direction.
However, Pappi teaches
a gantry tilt driving component (Figure 1, tilting actuator 31; Paragraph 0048, a tilting actuator 31 (shown in FIGS. 1 and 2) configured to tilt the mast 12 with respect to the chassis 11);
the gantry body is hinged to the body part; one end of the gantry tilt driving component is connected with the body part, and the other end of the gantry tilt driving component is connected with the gantry body (Figure 1, see tilting actuator 31, mast 12, and chassis 11; Paragraph 0048, a tilting actuator 31 (shown in FIGS. 1 and 2) configured to tilt the mast 12 with respect to the chassis 11);
the gantry tilt driving component is further communicated with the controller, and the controller is further configured to indicate the gantry tilt driving component to drive the gantry body to move, so as to adjust the fourth included angle between the gantry body and the vertical direction (Paragraph 0049, a tilt angle sensor 22 (FIG. 2) for detecting the tilt angle β (shown in FIG. 1) of the mast 12 with respect to the chassis 11 and to output to the control unit 20 tilt angle information indicating the detected tilt angle; Paragraph 0057 and 0059, the control unit 20 may be configured ... to control the tilting actuator 31 by limiting the tilt angle β below a maximum allowed forward tilt angle βmax,f of the mast based on the inclination information, the load information and the height information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a gantry tilting actuator, as taught by Pappi, to the gantry of Melchior. One would have been motivated to help facilitate loading and unloading of objects (Pappi paragraph 0002, The mast can be tilted with respect to the chassis to facilitate loading and unloading of the ware).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have had the capability to combine these systems and would have recognized that the combination would yield predictable results. Furthermore, each element in the combined context would perform the same function they did separately.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Pappi to Melchior because they are in the same field of endeavor directed to the same technology (forklifts), which would prompt its use based on design improvements that are predictable and recognized by one having ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 17, Melchior teaches for claim 2 as seen above.
Melchior fails to fully teach wherein the handling device further comprises a height detection sensor, wherein the height detection sensor is communicated with the controller, and the height detection sensor is on the at least one fork or on a raising and lowering component of the movable component, and configured to detect a height of the at least one fork in the vertical direction.
However, Pappi teaches
wherein the handling device further comprises a height detection sensor (Figure 1, see height HW; Paragraph 0052, a height sensor 23 (FIG. 2) for detecting the height HW (shown in FIG. 1) of the lifting element 13 with respect to the mast 12)
wherein the height detection sensor is communicated with the controller (Paragraph 0052, a height sensor 23 (FIG. 2) for detecting the height HW (shown in FIG. 1) of the lifting element 13 with respect to the mast and to output to the control unit 20 height information indicating the detected height of the lifting element 13),
and configured to detect a height of the at least one fork in the vertical direction (Paragraph 0052, a height sensor 23 (FIG. 2) for detecting the height HW (shown in FIG. 1) of the lifting element 13 with respect to the mast and to output to the control unit 20 height information indicating the detected height of the lifting element 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a height detection sensor, as taught by Pappi, to the handling device of Melchior. One would have been motivated to make this combination as a means of improving stability of the system (Pappi paragraph 0006, a control unit configured to control the plurality of actuating units based on information detected by the plurality of sensors for achieving stability of the industrial truck during operation)
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have had the capability to combine these systems and would have recognized that the combination would yield predictable results. Furthermore, each element in the combined context would perform the same function they did separately.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Pappi to Melchior because they are in the same field of endeavor directed to the same technology (forklifts), which would prompt its use based on design improvements that are predictable and recognized by one having ordinary skill in the art.
Pappi fails to fully teach the height detection sensor is on the at least one fork or on a raising and lowering component of the movable component. While Pappi does teach the existence of a height sensor, it does not teach the specific location of such a sensor. However, the placement of a sensor only requires routine skill for one of ordinary skill in the art to implement and a reasonable amount of experimentation would be required to determine possible locations that meet the operational metrics of the system.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reach the limitations present in the claim without undue experimentation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5, 7-8, 12, 15, and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art fails to fully teach wherein the 3D laser radar and point cloud data covers the forks of a forklift and uses said data to position the fork for operation. While prior art in the area of endeavor teaches the use of 3D laser radar and point cloud data, it typically teaches the use of this point cloud data to help map the direction and driving of systems and uses separate systems for positioning of the forks. Thus, the claim is considered to distinguish over the prior art.
Claims 5 and 18 are dependent on claim 4 and further limit the system, thus they likewise are considered to distinguish over the prior art.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art fails to fully teach all of the recited limitations present in the claim. While similar systems are taught to allow the forks to move laterally (see at least Xie (CN 215516523) and Liao et al. (CN 202311492959)), the specific requirements of multiple blocks, guideways, and driving components are not sufficiently anticipated nor obvious within the art of the field of endeavor. Thus, the claim is considered to distinguish over the prior art.
Claim 8 is dependent on claim 7 and further limits the system, thus it likewise is considered to distinguish over the prior art.
Regarding claims 11, as best understood based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issue identified above, and 12, the prior art fails to fully teach the use of an alarm to activate when the forks are not at an appropriate angle based on 3D point cloud data. While prior art does teach systems with alarms that activate under certain conditions, the activation of such an alarm based on angles acquired through 3D point cloud data is not sufficiently anticipated nor obvious within the art of the field of endeavor. Thus, the claim is considered to distinguish over the prior art.
Regarding claim 15, the prior art fails to fully teach the specifics of how an angle detector is attached to a handling device and how it collects angle information. While prior art teaches the use of an angle detector for determining tilt angles (see at least Pappi (US 20220002126)), the specific setup of such an angle detector is not sufficiently anticipated nor obvious within the art of the field of endeavor. Thus, the claim is considered to distinguish over the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure [See PTO-892 Notice of References Cited] because the prior art references contain subject matter that related to one or more the of the Applicant’s claim limitations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN THOMAS KOSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-7277. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (8:00 am - 4:30 pm EST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jacob S Scott can be reached at (571) 270-3415. 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.
/J.T.K./ Examiner, Art Unit 3655
/JACOB S. SCOTT/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights