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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the amendment filed with Terminal Disclaimer (TD) on 07/01/2026 (claimed foreign priority date 06/20/2022):
Claims 1-14, 16 and 18 have been examined.
Claims 15 and 17 have been canceled by Applicant.
Claims 1-2, 8-9, 16 and 18 have been amended by Applicant.
Legend: “Under BRI” = “under broadest reasonable interpretation;”
“[Prior Art/Analogous/Non-Analogous Art Reference] discloses through the invention” means “See/read entire document;” Paragraph [No..] = e.g., Para [0005] = paragraph 5; P = page, e.g., p4 = page 4; C = column, e.g. c3 = column 3;
Ln = line, e.g., ln25 = line 25; ln25-36 = lines 25 through 36.
Response to Amendment
Claim Objections
1. Applicant’s amendments have overcome the claims 2, 9, 16 and 18 objections to from the previous Office Action.
Claim Interpretation
1. Applicant appears not to argue, in remarks filed on 07/01/2026, the claim interpretation (invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitations in claims 1 and 16-18) from the previous office action.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 101
1. Applicant’s amendments and arguments in remarks filed on 07/01/2026 have overcome the 101 rejections to claims 1-14, 16 and 18 from the previous Office Action.
Double Patenting
1. Applicant’s amendments and Terminal Disclaimer (TD) filed on 07/01/2026 have overcome the provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejections to claims 1 and 17-18 from the previous Office Action.
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.
1. Claims 1-14, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hyun (KR20190100118A) in view of HUM (KR20200015096A).
As per claims 1 and 16, Hyun discloses through the invention (see entire document), a method of/system for generating a map (abstract – teaching creating an indoor map), comprising:
building (fig. 7d; numerous paragraphs, i.e., Para [0076] – teaching indoor map of a building);
a communication unit (fig. 5, Para [0058-0060] – teaching communication unit (510));
processing circuitry (Para [0011, 0017, 0033, 0105];
receiving a map editing request for a specific floor among a plurality of floors of a building (Para [0035, 0047, 0070, 0084] – teaching retrieving a drawing image of a building from the database (350) based on a drawing registration request signal from a terminal user; indoor map creation device (330) that can call up floor-by-floor drawings of a building stored in a database (350) based on a drawing registration request signal input to a user terminal (110, 500) (S110));
providing an editing interface on a display unit of an electronic device in response to the map editing request, the editing interface including at least a part of a specific map corresponding to the specific floor (Para [0035, 0047, 0070, 0084] – teaching indoor map creation device (330) that can enable the called drawing image to be displayed on the user interface screen of the user terminal (110));
specifying at least one node group allocatable on the specific map based on first node rules, the first node rules corresponding to spatial characteristics of the specific floor (Para [0019] – teaching a 'node' that refers to a specific location (or point) designated in advance for route setting on a map, and a 'link' may refer to a line segment connecting nodes for route setting on a map;
Para [0040] – teaching indoor map creation unit (330) that can perform the function of creating an indoor map of a specific building based on map creation command signals received from the user information collection unit (320); the indoor map creation unit (330) that can create an indoor map for each floor based on map creation command signals received from the user information collection unit (320), if the building consists of multiple floors; the indoor map creation unit (330) that can create an indoor map by using at least one of polygons, polylines, points, nodes, and links to draw major facilities (e.g., offices, restrooms, stairs, etc.) existing indoors on a map corresponding to a specific building);
Para [0074] – teaching indoor map creation device (330) that changes the position, size, shape, etc. of the drawing image (720) so that the border of the drawing image (720) and the border of the building (740) corresponding to the drawing image (720) match each other, and transmit UI information regarding the changed drawing image (730) to the user terminal (110);
fig. 7d, Para [0076] – teaching indoor map creation device (330) that detects and removes polygons (721) of a predetermined size or smaller, polylines (722) of a predetermined size or smaller, points/lines/surfaces (723) unnecessary for indoor map creation, numbers/symbols/shapes (724) unnecessary for indoor map creation, text (725) other than POI, etc. from the called drawing image (720).
The Examiner finds that the above, particularly “creating an indoor map by using at least one of polygons, polylines, points, nodes, and links to draw major facilities (e.g., offices, restrooms, stairs, etc.) existing indoors on a map corresponding to a specific building;” “removing polygons of a predetermined size or smaller, polylines of a predetermined size or smaller, points/lines/surfaces unnecessary for indoor map creation, numbers/symbols/shapes unnecessary for indoor map creation,” in the Hyun reference, teach on “specifying node group allocatable on specific map based on the first node rules corresponding to spatial characteristics of specific floor” in the instant application, similar to how “the node rules” are described/presented in the instant specification, e.g., Para [0177] as published, for example, which states that “… “node rules” define rules regarding which type of node needs to (or otherwise, should) be allocated (or placed) at which position on the specific map 1700 for each different spatial characteristic and situation in the space 10.”
Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, performing a node placement process such that first nodes included among the at least one node group are placed on the specific map according to the first node rules; causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes based on the performing of the node placement process.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in numerous paragraphs – teaching robot vacuum cleaner;
Para [0025, 0040] – teaching virtual wall within a building, a deceleration section of the autonomous driving device, and obstacle information within a building; autonomous driving device (20) as a robot that performs autonomous driving, installed in large buildings such as shopping malls, department stores, public facilities and industrial facilities, or in small and medium-sized buildings, and each drives along the same or different driving paths;
Para [0051-0052] – teaching planar images that include boundary lines that partition spaces within buildings such as shopping malls, department stores, public facilities, and industrial facilities; at least one of the spaces partitioned by boundary lines within the planar image set as a driving path that the autonomous driving device (20) can drive; these boundary lines used as components for generating basic map information; architectural drawings used for the construction of buildings such as shopping malls, department stores, public facilities, and industrial facilities, and can be produced in the format of CAD files or image files; these architectural drawings that include various components necessary for map information production;
Para [0061-0062] – teaching attribute information setting unit (123) that sets attribute information on the basic map information adjusted by the scale correction unit; the attribute information that may include information about a virtual area that the autonomous driving device (20) can refer to for driving and operation, a basic entry prevention area, a driving caution area, and information about the operation of the autonomous driving device (20); the attribute information that may include virtual walls inside the building, deceleration sections of the autonomous driving device (20), and obstacle information inside the building;
Para [0045, 0063-0067] – teaching map creation device (10) that updates the map information according to the update information to generate optimal map information suitable for the surrounding environment that changes in real time within the building; basic map information generation unit (12) that can update the basic map information according to the update information transmitted from the autonomous driving device (20); indoor space information conversion unit (121) can update the basic map information based on the path-based map correction information recognized based on the actual driving of the autonomous driving device (20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 2, Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, generating the specific map including: receiving sensing information from first robots traveling in the building, the sensing information indicating at least one of dynamic obstacles of the building or static obstacles of the building, generating a point cloud map of a first characteristic for first obstacles included on the specific floor using the sensing information, and generating a point cloud map of a second characteristic for the first obstacles included on the specific floor using the point cloud map of the first characteristic.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in fig. 5, Para [0004, 0025, 0036, 0046, 0061-0062, 0086, 0091] – teaching, in fig. 5, furniture i.e., office desks, office chairs, which are dynamic obstacles that can be removed/moved; teaching other obstacles, wall, locations, ceilings, floors, etc., which are static obstacles that are not removable/movable; teaching, in fig. 5, Para [0036, 0046], cloud-based spatial information.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 3, Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, point cloud map of the first characteristic configured to include three-dimensional information on the first obstacles; the point cloud map of the second characteristic that includes two-dimensional information on the first obstacles generated based on the three-dimensional information; and the point cloud map of the second characteristic flattened from the point cloud map of the first characteristic with respect to a traveling plane of second robots traveling on the specific floor.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in fig. 5, Para [0036, 0046, 0061-0062, 0086, 0091] – teaching, in fig. 3-5, floor two-dimensional guide; three-dimensional furniture i.e., office desks, office chairs, which are dynamic obstacles that can be removed/moved; teaching other obstacles, wall, locations, ceilings, floors, etc., which are static obstacles that are not removable/movable; teaching, in fig. 5, Para [0036, 0046], cloud-based spatial information.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 4, Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, generating the specific map reflecting first static obstacles included on the specific floor using a floor plan and the point cloud map of the second characteristic, the floor plan reflecting the spatial characteristics of the specific floor, the specific map including graphic objects corresponding to each of the first static obstacles.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in fig. 5, Para [0004, 0025, 0036, 0046, 0061-0062, 0086, 0091] – teaching, in fig. 5, teaching obstacles, e.g., wall, ceilings, floors, etc., which are static obstacles that are not removable/movable; teaching, in fig. 5, Para [0036, 0046], cloud-based spatial information.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 5, Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, specifying obstacle types of the first static obstacles based on the floor plan; and mapping type information of at least one of the obstacle types to each of the graphic objects.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in fig. 5, Para [0004, 0025, 0036, 0046, 0061-0062, 0086, 0091] – teaching, in fig. 5, teaching graphics/images/drawings of specified obstacles, e.g., wall, ceilings, floors, etc., which are static obstacles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 6, Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, first static obstacles that include: at least one of walls, doors or facilities that form the specific floor; and at least one of an elevator, escalator, access control gate, robot-exclusive road, or robot-shared road which are configured to be usable by at least one of the second robots or people traveling on the specific floor.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in fig. 5, Para [0004, 0025, 0036, 0046, 0061-0062, 0086, 0091] – teaching, in fig. 5, teaching static, non- removable/movable obstacles/objects; other obstacles, e.g., wall, ceilings, floors, etc., for use/travel for human/robotic vehicles, such as a robotic vacuum cleaner(s).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 7, Hyun further discloses through the invention (see entire document), node rule information stored in a database of a server, the node rule information including the obstacle types mapped to node rules, each of the node rules being defined for a corresponding one among the obstacle types; and the specifying of the at least one node group that includes, extracting the first node rules from the database, the first node rules being mapped to the obstacle types of the first static obstacles, and specifying the at least one node group in which the first nodes are arranged according to the first node rules (fig. 3, Para [0034-0038, 0042, 0068-0069] – teaching geographic information construction server (120) that can perform the function of providing geographic information stored in a database (i.e., indoor map and outdoor map) in response to a request from a terminal user; the geographic information construction server that may have more or fewer components; map data storage unit (not shown) that stores map data provided by a GIS (geographic information system) server (not shown); storing a drawing image uploaded by the user terminal (110) or an indoor map created through the user terminal (110) in the database).
As per claim 8, Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, at least one node group configured such that at least one of a number of nodes, an arrangement form of nodes, or a connection direction between nodes that defines a robot movement direction differs according to a type of a graphic object.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in fig. 5, Para [0087, 0090] – teaching movement information of the autonomous driving device (20), such as the direction of movement, speed of movement, and displacement of movement, can be detected; driving motor that generates a driving force to rotate each wheel, and by controlling each wheel independently through this driving motor, the autonomous driving device (20) can drive in various directions and at various speeds.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 9, Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, first obstacles that include a first type of static obstacle and a second type of static obstacle; graphic objects that include a first graphic object corresponding to the first type of static obstacle and a second graphic object corresponding to the second type of static obstacle; specific map that includes a first area and a second area, the first area including the first graphic object and the second area including the second graphic object; at least one node group that includes a first node group and a second node group; and performing of the node placement process that includes: placing nodes of the first node group in the first area according to the first node rules corresponding to the first type of static obstacle, and placing nodes of the second node group in the second area according to the first node rules corresponding to the second type of static obstacle.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in fig. 5, Para [0004, 0025, 0036, 0046, 0061-0062, 0086, 0091] – teaching, in fig. 5, static, non- removable/movable obstacles/objects; other obstacles, e.g., wall, ceilings, floors, etc., for use/travel for human/robotic vehicles, such as a robotic vacuum cleaner(s); Para [0061-0062] – teaching attribute information setting unit (123) that sets attribute information on the basic map information adjusted by the scale correction unit; the attribute information that may include information about a virtual area that the autonomous driving device (20) can refer to for driving and operation, a basic entry prevention area, a driving caution area, and information about the operation of the autonomous driving device (20); the attribute information that may include virtual walls inside the building, deceleration sections of the autonomous driving device (20), and obstacle information inside the building.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 10, Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, performing an inspection process to inspect whether the first nodes are allowed to be placed on the specific map according to the first node rules and types of the graphic objects in response to completion of the node placement process; and updating the specific map on a server based on placement of the first nodes according to the first node rules is approved through the inspection process.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in Para [0044, 0065, 0092] – teaching autonomous driving device (20) that performs autonomous driving based on map information received from the map creation device (10) and recognizes spatial information regarding the surrounding environment, compares the map information and the spatial information to determine whether they match, and generates update information based on the result of the determination and transmits it to the control server (30); autonomous driving device (20) that generates map correction information based on whether it matches the map information received from the map creation device (10) and the spatial information it generates itself; update information generation unit (25) that compares the map information received from the map creation device (10) with the spatial information generated by the spatial recognition unit (24) to determine whether they match, and generates update information according to the result of the determination.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 11, Hyun further discloses through the invention (see entire document), visually highlighting at least one node group area including the first nodes placed according to the first node rules such that an inspection entity is able to identify and inspect the at least one node group area (Para [0101] – teaching indoor map creation device (330) that can display the color, size, or shape of the additional node (1330) differently from the color, size, or shape of the points (1340) constituting the polygon (1310).
As per claim 12, Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, providing guide information notifying that at least one node among the first nodes is able to be placed in an area where a first graphic object is positioned, the first graphic object being among the graphic objects.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in fig. 3, Para [0009, 0012, 0022, 0036, 0041, 0046, 0049] – teaching creating map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information, and provide it to an autonomous driving device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 13, Hyun further discloses through the invention (see entire document), information that includes arrangement information indicating arrangement of the at least one node and an icon for obtaining approval for placement of the first nodes; and placing the at least one node in an area where the first graphic object is positioned in response to a selection of the icon is selected through the electronic device (fig. 13, Para [0101-0104] – teaching a line middle (1320) of a polygon (1310) displayed on an indoor map selected and dragged, the indoor map creation device (330) that can change the shape of the polygon (1310) according to the drag input and automatically add a new node (1330) at the end point of the drag input; at this time, the newly added node (1330) that can be marked to be distinguished from the points (1340) that make up the polygon (1310); indoor map creation device (330) that may display a layer selection menu (1410) for selecting any one of the overlapping elements on the map creation screen (1400).
Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, providing guide information; performing of the node placement process.
However, HUM discloses these limitations/features through the invention (see entire document), particularly in fig. 3, Para [0009, 0012, 0022, 0036, 0041, 0046, 0049, 0061-0062].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
As per claim 14, Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, providing of the guide information that includes outputting the guide information based on the area where the first graphic object is positioned being selected from the electronic device, the area where the first graphic object is positioned being on the specific map.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in fig. 3, Para [0009, 0012, 0022, 0036, 0041, 0046, 0049] – teaching creating map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information, and provide it to an autonomous driving device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
Claims 15 and 17 canceled.
2. Claim 18 recites most of its limitations/features that are similar to the limitation/features of claims 1 and 14. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hyun (KR20190100118A) in view of HUM (KR20200015096A) as applied to claims 1 and 16.
Hyun does not explicitly disclose through the invention, or is missing, building in which a plurality of robots provide services; robots that coexist with people; cloud server configured to perform control of the robots based on a building map generated; performing a node placement process such that nodes included among the at least one node group are placed on the specific map according to the node rules; updating specific map on the cloud server based on completion of the node placement process such that the robots travel on the specific floor along the nodes placed on the specific map.
However, HUM discloses through the invention (see entire document), particularly in numerous paragraphs – teaching robot vacuum cleaner;
Para [0025, 0040] – teaching virtual wall within a building, a deceleration section of the autonomous driving device, and obstacle information within a building; autonomous driving device (20) as a robot that performs autonomous driving, installed in large buildings such as shopping malls, department stores, public facilities and industrial facilities, or in small and medium-sized buildings, and each drives along the same or different driving paths;
fig. 1, Para [0039, 0044-0045, 0093] – teaching map-making device (10) connected to a plurality of autonomous driving devices (20) and a control server (30) respectively through a wired or wireless communication network; control server (30) that receives update information from the autonomous driving device (20) and transmits it to the map creation device (10), and the map creation device (10) that updates the map information according to the update information to generate optimal map information suitable for the surrounding environment that changes in real time within the building; device control unit (26) that transmits location information or operation status information of the autonomous driving device (20) to the control server (30), thereby enabling the control server (30) to monitor the autonomous driving device (20) in real time;
Para [0051-0052] – teaching planar images that include boundary lines that partition spaces within buildings such as shopping malls, department stores, public facilities, and industrial facilities; at least one of the spaces partitioned by boundary lines within the planar image set as a driving path that the autonomous driving device (20) can drive; these boundary lines used as components for generating basic map information; architectural drawings used for the construction of buildings such as shopping malls, department stores, public facilities, and industrial facilities, and can be produced in the format of CAD files or image files; these architectural drawings that include various components necessary for map information production;
Para [0061-0062] – teaching attribute information setting unit (123) that sets attribute information on the basic map information adjusted by the scale correction unit; the attribute information that may include information about a virtual area that the autonomous driving device (20) can refer to for driving and operation, a basic entry prevention area, a driving caution area, and information about the operation of the autonomous driving device (20); the attribute information that may include virtual walls inside the building, deceleration sections of the autonomous driving device (20), and obstacle information inside the building;
Para [0045, 0063-0067] – teaching map creation device (10) that updates the map information according to the update information to generate optimal map information suitable for the surrounding environment that changes in real time within the building; basic map information generation unit (12) that can update the basic map information according to the update information transmitted from the autonomous driving device (20); indoor space information conversion unit (121) can update the basic map information based on the path-based map correction information recognized based on the actual driving of the autonomous driving device (20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant's arguments filed 07/01/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
2. In response to Applicant’s arguments on page 9 of the remarks filed 07/01/2026 that “[t]he Office Action does not indicate the status of the drawings;” that “… Applicants request the Examiner to provide this indication in the next PTO communication,” the Examiner presents the following: the Form PTOL-326 has been changed. Due to administrative oversight indication of the status of the drawings was not included in the Form PTOL-326 but was necessary to support the previous office action. Accordingly, the Form PTOL-326 has been corrected to reflect that the drawings filed on 13 December 2024 are accepted by the Examiner.
3. In response to Applicant’s arguments on page 9 of the remarks filed 07/01/2026 that “[t]he Action does not acknowledge Applicants' foreign priority claim or receipt of a certified copy of the priority document;” that “[a]pplicants request the Examiner to provide these acknowledgements in the next PTO communication,” the Examiner presents the following: as presented on the Form PTOL-326, the acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f). However, none of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received and/or found in the previously and later filed correspondence. Therefore, the claimed foreign priority date of 06/20/2022 has been acknowledged but has not been considered.
4. Applicant's argues on pages 14-16 of the remarks filed 07/01/2026 that “… the cited documents neither Hyun nor Hum describes or suggests at least, "specifying at least one node group allocatable on the specific map based on first node rules, the first node rule corresponding to spatial characteristics of the specific floor," as recited by claim 1;” that “… Hyun is silent, however, regarding "specifying at least one node group allocatable on the specific map based on first node rules, the first node rules corresponding to spatial characteristics of the specific floor" f emphasis added], as recited by claim 1. Accordingly, Hyun does not describe or suggest at least, "specifying at least one node group allocatable on the specific map based on first node rules, the first node rules corresponding to spatial characteristics of the specific floor," as recited by claim 1;” that “…by even cursory review, one can appreciate that Hum does not describe or suggest the above-quoted features of claim 1, and the Examiner has not provided any evidence to the contrary;” that “… the Office Action fails to establish that Hyun or Hum, taken singly or m combination, describes or suggests at least, "specifying at least one node group allocatable on the specific map based on first node rules, the first node rules corresponding to spatial characteristics of the specific floor," as recited by claim 1;” that “[s]ince the rejection fails to describe or suggest each and every element of claim 1, Applicants respectfully submit that no prima facie case of obviousness has been established with respect to claim 1,” and further Applicant cites what the Hyun reference presents in Para [0040], BUT, HOWEVER, Applicant does not provide an evidence or explanation for WHY OR HOW the cited documents neither Hyun, in other paragraphs beside Para [0040], nor Hum describes or suggests at least, "specifying at least one node group allocatable on the specific map based on first node rules, the first node rule corresponding to spatial characteristics of the specific floor," as recited by claim 1; ORT WHY OR HOW Hyun, in other paragraphs beside Para [0040], is silent, however, regarding "specifying at least one node group allocatable on the specific map based on first node rules, the first node rules corresponding to spatial characteristics of the specific floor" [emphasis added], as recited by claim 1; OR WHY AND/OR HOW Hyun does not describe or suggest at least, "specifying at least one node group allocatable on the specific map based on first node rules, the first node rules corresponding to spatial characteristics of the specific floor," as recited by claim 1; OR WHY AND/OR HOW by even cursory review, one can appreciate that Hum does not describe or suggest the above-quoted features of claim 1, and the Examiner has not provided any evidence to the contrary; OR WHY AND/OR HOW the Office Action fails to establish that Hyun or Hum, taken singly or in combination, describes or suggests at least, "specifying at least one node group allocatable on the specific map based on first node rules, the first node rules corresponding to spatial characteristics of the specific floor," as recited by claim 1; OR WHY AND/OR HOW no prima facie case of obviousness has been established with respect to claim 1.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees, and kindly draws Applicant’s attention at pages 2-5 of the instant office action above, where it is discussed, in details, how the combination of the prior art references (Hyun in view of Hum) teaches, suggests, and fully meets all the claimed elements, features, and limitations, wherein the Examiner finds that the above, particularly “creating an indoor map by using at least one of polygons, polylines, points, nodes, and links to draw major facilities (e.g., offices, restrooms, stairs, etc.) existing indoors on a map corresponding to a specific building;” “removing polygons of a predetermined size or smaller, polylines of a predetermined size or smaller, points/lines/surfaces unnecessary for indoor map creation, numbers/symbols/shapes unnecessary for indoor map creation,” in the Hyun reference, teach on “specifying node group allocatable on specific map based on the first node rules corresponding to spatial characteristics of specific floor” in the instant application, similar to how “the node rules” are described/presented in the instant specification, e.g., Para [0177] as published, for example, which states that “… “node rules” define rules regarding which type of node needs to (or otherwise, should) be allocated (or placed) at which position on the specific map 1700 for each different spatial characteristic and situation in the space 10;” and wherein the Examiner finds that “[i]t would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).”
Therefore it is believed that the rejections should be maintained.
5. Applicant's argues on pages 16-17 of the remarks filed 07/01/2026 that “… neither Hyun nor Hum describes or suggests at least, "causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes placed according to the first node rules, based on the performing of the node placement process," as recited by amended claim 1;” that “…Hum does not describe or suggest at least, "causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes placed according to the first node rules, based on the performing of the node placement process;"” that “… Hum is silent, however, regarding "causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes placed according to the first node rules, based on the performing of the node placement process" [emphasis added], as recited by amended claim 1;” that “… Hum does not describe "nodes" along which the autonomous driving device "travel[s];" that “… Hum does not describe or suggest at least, "causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes placed according to the first node rules, based on the performing of the node placement process," as recited by amended claim 1;” that “… the Office Action fails to establish that Hyun or Hum, taken singly or in combination, describes or suggests at least, "causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes placed according to the first node rules, based on the performing of the node placement process," as recited by amended claim 1;” that “… the rejection fails to describe or suggest each and every element of claim 1,” and further Applicant cites what the Hum reference presents in Para [0025, 0040, 0061-0068], BUT, HOWEVER, Applicant does not provide an evidence or explanation for WHY OR HOW neither Hyun nor Hum describes or suggests at least, "causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes placed according to the first node rules, based on the performing of the node placement process," as recited by amended claim 1; OR WHY AND/OR HOW Hum does not describe or suggest at least, "causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes placed according to the first node rules, based on the performing of the node placement process;"” OR WHY AND/OR HOW Hum is silent, however, regarding "causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes placed according to the first node rules, based on the performing of the node placement process" [emphasis added], as recited by amended claim 1; OR WHY AND/OR HOW Hum does not describe "nodes" along which the autonomous driving device "travel[s]; OR WHY AND/OR HOW Hum does not describe or suggest at least, "causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes placed according to the first node rules, based on the performing of the node placement process," as recited by amended claim 1; OR WHY AND/OR HOW the Office Action fails to establish that Hyun or Hum, taken singly or in combination, describes or suggests at least, "causing at least one robot to travel on the specific floor along the first nodes placed according to the first node rules, based on the performing of the node placement process," as recited by amended claim 1; OR WHY AND/OR HOW the rejection fails to describe or suggest each and every element of claim 1.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees, and kindly draws Applicant’s attention at pages 2-5 of the instant office action above, where it is discussed, in details, how the combination of the prior art references (Hyun in view of Hum) teaches, suggests, and fully meets all the claimed elements, features, and limitations, wherein the Examiner finds that the above, particularly “creating an indoor map by using at least one of polygons, polylines, points, nodes, and links to draw major facilities (e.g., offices, restrooms, stairs, etc.) existing indoors on a map corresponding to a specific building;” “removing polygons of a predetermined size or smaller, polylines of a predetermined size or smaller, points/lines/surfaces unnecessary for indoor map creation, numbers/symbols/shapes unnecessary for indoor map creation,” in the Hyun reference, teach on “specifying node group allocatable on specific map based on the first node rules corresponding to spatial characteristics of specific floor” in the instant application, similar to how “the node rules” are described/presented in the instant specification, e.g., Para [0177] as published, for example, which states that “… “node rules” define rules regarding which type of node needs to (or otherwise, should) be allocated (or placed) at which position on the specific map 1700 for each different spatial characteristic and situation in the space 10;” and wherein the Examiner finds that “[i]t would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, who is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automation, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teaching of Hyun by incorporating, applying and utilizing the above steps, technique and features as taught by HUM, who is in the same field of endeavor. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of and/or in order to create map information using indoor spatial information such as building drawings, floor guide drawings, SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Map-Building, Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) maps, and point cloud-based spatial information (see entire HUM document, particularly Para [0009]).”
Therefore it is believed that the rejections should be maintained.
6. Regarding the applicant’s arguments on page 17 of the remarks with respect to claims 2-14 that “claims 2-14 are patentable over the cited art at least by virtue of their dependency,” the examiner presents the same arguments regarding the rejection as presented for claims 1, 16 and 18.
For the above reason, it is believed that the rejections should be maintained.
7. Applicant's argues on pages 18-19 of the remarks filed 07/01/2026 that “… neither Hyun nor Hum describes or suggests at least, "node rule information is stored in a database of a server, the node rule information including the obstacle types mapped to node rules, each of the node rules being defined for a corresponding one among the obstacle types; and the specifying of the at least one node group includes ... extracting the first node rules from the database, the first node rules being mapped to the obstacle types of the first static obstacles, and specifying the at least one node group in which the first nodes are arranged according to the first node rules," as recited by claim 7;” that “…Hyun is silent regarding "node rule information," and is likewise silent regarding "node rule information [being] stored in a database of a server;”" that “… Hyun does not describe or suggest at least, "the first node rules being mapped to the obstacle types of the first static obstacles," as recited by claim 7;” that “… Hyun does not describe or suggest at least, "node rule information is stored in a database of a server, the node rule information including the obstacle types mapped to node rules, each of the node rules being defined for a corresponding one among the obstacle types; and the specifying of the at least one node group includes ... extracting the first node rules from the database, the first node rules being mapped to the obstacle types of the first static obstacles, and specifying the at least one node group in which the first nodes are arranged according to the first node rules," as recited by claim 7;” that “… by even cursory review, one can appreciate that Hum does not describe or suggest the above-quoted features of claim 7, and the Examiner has not provided any evidence to the contrary;” that “… the Office Action fails to establish that Hyun or Hum, taken singly or m combination, describes or suggests at least, "node rule information is stored in a database of a server, the node rule information including the obstacle types mapped to node rules, each of the node rules being defined for a corresponding one among the obstacle types; and the specifying of the at least one node group includes ... extracting the first node rules from the database, the first node rules being mapped to the obstacle types of the first static obstacles, and specifying the at least one node group in which the first nodes are arranged according to the first node rules," as recited by claim 7;” that “[s]ince the rejection fails to describe or suggest each and every element of claim 7;” that “… no prima facie case of obviousness has been established with respect to claim 7,” BUT, HOWEVER, Applicant does not provide an evidence or explanation for WHY OR HOW neither Hyun nor Hum describes or suggests at least, "node rule information is stored in a database of a server, the node rule information including the obstacle types mapped to node rules, each of the node rules being defined for a corresponding one among the obstacle types; and the specifying of the at least one node group includes ... extracting the first node rules from the database, the first node rules being mapped to the obstacle types of the first static obstacles, and specifying the at least one node group in which the first nodes are arranged according to the first node rules," as recited by claim 7; OR WHY AND/OR HOW Hyun is silent regarding "node rule information," and is likewise silent regarding "node rule information [being] stored in a database of a server;” OR WHY AND/OR HOW Hyun does not describe or suggest at least, "the first node rules being mapped to the obstacle types of the first static obstacles," as recited by claim 7; OT WHY AND/OR HOW Hyun does not describe or suggest at least, "node rule information is stored in a database of a server, the node rule information including the obstacle types mapped to node rules, each of the node rules being defined for a corresponding one among the obstacle types; and the specifying of the at least one node group includes ... extracting the first node rules from the database, the first node rules being mapped to the obstacle types of the first static obstacles, and specifying the at least one node group in which the first nodes are arranged according to the first node rules," as recited by claim 7; OR WHY AND/OR HOW by even cursory review, one can appreciate that Hum does not describe or suggest the above-quoted features of claim 7, and the Examiner has not provided any evidence to the contrary; ORTWHY AND/OR HOW the Office Action fails to establish that Hyun or Hum, taken singly or m combination, describes or suggests at least, "node rule information is stored in a database of a server, the node rule information including the obstacle types mapped to node rules, each of the node rules being defined for a corresponding one among the obstacle types; and the specifying of the at least one node group includes ... extracting the first node rules from the database, the first node rules being mapped to the obstacle types of the first static obstacles, and specifying the at least one node group in which the first nodes are arranged according to the first node rules," as recited by claim 7; OR WHY AND/OR HOW the rejection fails to describe or suggest each and every element of claim 7; OR WHY AND/OR HOW no prima facie case of obviousness has been established with respect to claim 7.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees, and kindly draws Applicant’s attention at page 7 of the instant office action above, where it is discussed, in details, how the Hyun reference teaches, suggests, and fully meets all the claimed elements, features, and limitations.
Therefore it is believed that the rejections should be maintained.
8. Regarding the applicant’s arguments on page 19 of the remarks with respect to claims 8-14 that “claims 8-14 are patentable over the cited art at least by virtue of their dependency,” the examiner presents the same arguments regarding the rejection as presented for claims 1, 7, 16 and 18.
For the above reason, it is believed that the rejections should be maintained.
RELEVANT PRIOR ART THAT WAS CITED BUT NOT APPLIED
The following relevant prior art references that were found, by the Examiner while performing initial and/or additional search, cited but not applied:
Rombouts (US20190249998) – (see entire Rombouts document, particularly abstract – teaching systems and methods for robotic mapping; a robot that can travel in an environment; from travelling in the environment, the robot that can create a graph comprising a plurality of nodes, wherein each node corresponds to a scan taken by a sensor of the robot at a location in the environment; the robot that can generate a map of the environment from the graph. In some cases, to facilitate map generation, the robot can constrain the graph to start and end at a substantially similar location; the robot that can also perform scan matching on extended scan groups, determined from identifying overlap between scans, to further determine the location of features in a map).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner YURI KAN, P.E., whose phone number is 571-270-3978. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by phone are unsuccessful, you may contact the examiner's supervisor, Mr. Jelani Smith, who can be reached on 571-270-3969. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YURI KAN, P.E./ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights