Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/979,448

COOPERATIVE CONTROL METOD FOR MULTI-ROBOT AND DEVICE THEREOF

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 12, 2024
Priority
Dec 13, 2023 — RE 10-2023-0180336
Examiner
SINGH, ESVINDER
Art Unit
3657
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Korea Institute Of Science And Technology
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 2m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
153 granted / 201 resolved
+24.1% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
229
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
§103
85.8%
+45.8% vs TC avg
§102
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§112
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 201 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Status of Claims Claims 1-19 were originally filed on 12/12/2024 and claimed priority on KR10-2023-0180336, which was filed on 12/13/2023. Information Disclosure Statement The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 01/29/2026 has been considered. An initialed copy of the Form 1449 is enclosed herewith. 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 1-4, 8-14, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higashi (US 20220281106 A1) in view of Seo et al (US 20210122049 A1) (Hereinafter referred to as Higashi and Seo respectively) Regarding Claims 1, 10, and 11, Higashi teaches a cooperation control method of a multi-robot performed by a control device (See at least Higashi Paragraph 0016 and Figure 5), one or more non-transitory computer readable mediums (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0092-0093, the memory is interpreted as a non-transitory computer readable medium)…, a cooperative control device of a multi-robot (See at least Higashi Paragraph 0016 and Figure 1) comprising: a communication unit (See at least Higashi Paragraph 0094)…, and a processing unit…that control a plurality of robots to provide a service necessary for the user (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0092 and 0103-0105, the control platform, which includes a processor, controls the plurality of robot groups to provide a service), wherein the processing unit is further configured to… recognizing an intention or a situational context of the user (See at least Higashi Paragraph 0104, the service desired by the user, which is interpreted as the intent, is recognized)…; selecting a task that a plurality of robots are able to cooperatively perform in response to the recognized intention or situational context of the user (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0016, 0046, 0105, 0125-0126, and Figure 5, the tasks/jobs for the plurality of robots to cooperatively perform in response to the recognized intention/service are selected); and requesting a service provision to each of the plurality of robots that are able to cooperatively perform the selected task (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0128, 0132, 0136, 0141, 0145 and Figure 5, the command signals, which are interpreted as service provisions, are sent to each of the plurality of robots). Higashi fails to explicitly disclose the non-transitory computer readable medium…storing one or more instructions, wherein the one or more instructions executable by one or more processors, the communication unit is…configured to receive information on a user or information on surroundings of the user detected using at least one sensor; the processing unit is…configured to execute instructions, detecting information on a user or information on surroundings of the user using at least one sensor; and recognizing an intention or a situational context of the user…based on the detected information. However, Seo teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium…storing one or more instructions, wherein the one or more instructions executable by one or more processors (See at least Seo Paragraph 0044, the processor executes programs/instructions stored in the memory), the communication unit is…configured to receive information on a user or information on surroundings of the user detected using at least one sensor (See at least Seo Paragraphs 0030-0032, 0036, and 0103-0104, sensor information is received, which is information on a user and information on a surrounding of the user); the processing unit is…configured to execute instructions (See at least Seo Paragraph 0044, the processor executes programs/instructions stored in the memory), detecting information on a user or information on surroundings of the user using at least one sensor (See at least Seo Paragraphs 0032, 0036, and 0104, information on a user and the surrounding environment is detected using the sensor); and recognizing an intention or a situational context of the user…based on the detected information (See at least Seo Paragraph 0064, the intention is determined based on the detected information of the user). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the teachings disclosed in Higashi with Seo to have the processor execute instructions stored in the non-transitory computer readable medium, and to recognize an intention based on the detected information on a user or surrounding of the user. Having a processor execute instructions stored in the non-transitory computer readable medium, as taught by Seo, is routine and well-understood in the art, and allows for the processor to execute the application programs necessary to control components of the system (See at least Seo Paragraph 0044). By using the sensor information on the user or surrounding of the user to recognize an intention of the user, as taught by Seo, the robot may obtain intention information by simply detecting the user’s behavior or voice input and perform operations accordingly (See at least Seo Paragraphs 0032, 0036, 0064, and 0104), which would increase the autonomy of the system. Regarding Claims 2 and 12, modified Higashi teaches registering at least one unit function that is able to be provided from each of the plurality of robots (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0104-0106, and 0123-0126, a unit function/job that is able to be provided from each of the plurality of robots is assigned/registered) and pre-generating a cooperative executable task of the plurality of robots from a combination of the registered unit functions (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0126-0127, a transmission schedule of the command signal for the five jobs using the three robots is determined, which is interpreted as pre-generating a cooperative executable task). Regarding Claims 3 and 13, modified Higashi teaches wherein the unit function is either a unique function corresponding to an action that a robot is able to perform, or a plurality of functions that are able to be applied as different roles depending on the intention or situational context of the user for an action that a robot is able to perform (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0123-0126, the unit function is a unique function/job that corresponds to an action that the robot is able to perform). Regarding Claims 4 and 14, modified Higashi teaches wherein the task includes a plurality of unit functions that process a complex action required to achieve a purpose (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0124-0125, the task/jobs include a plurality of unit functions for the robots to perform in order to achieve a purpose), wherein each of the plurality of unit functions is matched to a robot capable of providing the corresponding unit function (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0125-0126, each function/job is matched to a robot capable of performing the function/job), and wherein an order of action execution and a target of communication between the plurality of robots cooperating to achieve the purpose are set (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0127-0137 and Figure 5, a schedule/order of action execution and target of communication between the plurality of cooperating robots are set/determined using the control platform). Regarding Claims 8-9 and 18-19, modified Higashi teaches identifying a plurality of unit functions matched to the selected task (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0125-0126, a plurality of unit functions/jobs are identified); and instructing each of the plurality of robots capable of performing the identified unit functions to mutually perform the corresponding unit function in time series (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0126-0128, 0132, 0136, 0141, 0145 and Figure 5, the robots are instructed to mutually perform the unit functions in time series), wherein requesting the service provision further comprises: controlling an exchange of information on an execution order and an execution process between the robots (See at least Higashi Paragraphs 0127-0137 and Figure 5, the control platform controls an exchange of information on the execution order and process between the robots). Claims 5-6, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higashi in view of Seo, and in further view of Yamada (US 20150274421 A1) (Hereinafter referred to as Yamada) Regarding Claims 5-6 and 15-16, modified Higashi fails to disclose wherein recognizing the intention or situational context of the user comprises: receiving additional information related to a prearranged behavior of the user; and selecting a most similar candidate among candidates for the intention or situational context of the user based on the received additional information and the detected information, wherein selecting the most similar candidate comprises: pre-configuring multiple candidates with respect to the intention or situational context of the user based on at least two combinations of information on physical characteristics of the user, the information on the surroundings of the user, environmental information on a space where the user is located, and information related to a behavior of the user; and determining a candidate with a highest degree of matching among the multiple candidates using the received additional information and the detected information. However, Yamada teaches wherein recognizing the intention or situational context of the user comprises: receiving additional information related to a prearranged behavior of the user (See at least Yamada Paragraphs 0092-0093, 0166-0167, and Figure 6, the request history database is interpreted as additional information related to a prearranged behavior of the user); and selecting a most similar candidate among candidates for the intention or situational context of the user based on the received additional information and the detected information (See at least Yamada Paragraphs 0092-0093, 0165-0169, and Figure 6, the most similar condition from among the candidates in the request history DB is selected/extracted based on the additional and detected information), wherein selecting the most similar candidate comprises: pre-configuring multiple candidates with respect to the intention or situational context of the user based on at least two combinations of information on physical characteristics of the user, the information on the surroundings of the user, environmental information on a space where the user is located, and information related to a behavior of the user (See at least Yamada Paragraphs 0092-0093, 0165-0169, and Figure 6, there are multiple candidates in the request history DB based on the space where the user is located, and the behavior/posture of the user); and determining a candidate with a highest degree of matching among the multiple candidates using the received additional information and the detected information (See at least Yamada Paragraphs 0092-0093, 0165-0169, and Figure 6, the candidate that is most similar is extracted using the additional and detected information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the teachings disclosed in modified Higashi with Yamada to determine a candidate with a highest degree of matching among the multiple candidates using the received additional information and the detected information. This modification, as taught by Yamada, allows the system to determine the user’s intention by comparing the current user’s state to a user state stored in a database, thus, allowing the system to notify the robot about the request/intent in advance, which would reduce the time taken for the robot to perform the task (See at least Yamada Paragraphs 0092-0093, 0165-0169, and Figure 6). Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higashi in view of Seo, and in further view of Yang et al (CN113268331A) (Hereinafter referred to as Yang) Regarding Claims 7 and 17, even though modified Higashi teaches a task corresponding to the recognized intention or situational context of the user, modified Higashi fails to disclose selecting a top priority task corresponding to the recognized intention or situational context of the user and checking whether a robot for cooperatively performing the top priority task is in an idle state; and when the robot for cooperatively performing the top priority task is not in the idle state, selecting a next priority task corresponding to the recognized intention or situational context of the user and in which a robot for cooperatively performing the next priority task is in the idle state. However, Yang teaches selecting a top priority task and checking whether a robot for cooperatively performing the top priority task is in an idle state (See at least Yang Page 5 Paragraphs 2-3 and Table 1, and Page 7 Paragraphs 3-5 and Table 3, job 3 is the top priority task, and there is no idle robot for performing job 3); and when the robot for cooperatively performing the top priority task is not in the idle state, selecting a next priority task and in which a robot for cooperatively performing the next priority task is in the idle state (See at least Yang Page 5 Paragraphs 2-3 and Table 1, and Page 7 Paragraphs 3-5 and Table 3, job 1 is a next top priority task, and the idle robot 1 can perform job 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the teachings disclosed in modified Higashi with Yang to select a next priority task corresponding to the recognized intention or situational context of the user and in which a robot for cooperatively performing the next priority task is in the idle state when the robot for cooperatively performing the top priority task is not in the idle state. This modification, as taught by Yang, would ensure that only the suitable robots that are idle and are capable of performing a task are called to perform the task (See at least Yang Page 7 Paragraphs 3-5 and Table 3), thus, improving the coordination of the system. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kohara et al (US 20230330861 A1) teaches controlling a robot and cooperating devices based on user detection information Suzuki et al (US 20220088788 A1) teaches controlling a plurality of robots based on the state of a person Yim et al (US 20210174370 A1) teaches cooperating robots in a restaurant setting Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ESVINDER SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-7875. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9 am-5 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, Abby Lin can be reached at 571-270-3976. 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. /ESVINDER SINGH/Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 12, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12636783
ROBOTIC ARM, METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING ROBOTIC ARM, ROBOT, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 8m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12629832
ROBOT CONTROL DEVICE
3y 3m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12617097
DYNAMIC ALTERATION OF OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS OF A MACHINE
2y 6m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12617094
TEACH PENDANT CHANGE POSITION TOUCHUP VISUALIZATION
2y 1m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12612105
VEHICLE AND VEHICLE STEERING CONTROL SYSTEM AND METHOD
1y 11m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.1%)
2y 7m (~1y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 201 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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