DETAILED ACTION
Remarks
This non-final office action is in response to the application filled on 12/18/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending and examined below.
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
The certified copy has not been filed in parent Application No. JP 2023/216726, filed on 12/22/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
As of date of this action, IDS filled has been annotated and considered.
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.
Claim(s) 14-18 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 14, which recites “a second control quantity” line 7 is not clear since claim 1 also mention second control quantity. It is not clear both second control quantity are same or different.
Dependent claim(s) 14-16 is/are also rejected because they do not resolve their parent deficiencies.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 14 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0066700 (“Toumatsu”), and further in view of US 2021/0179076 (“Nakada”).
Regarding claim 1 (and similarly claim 19), Toumatsu discloses a robot system (see at least fig 1) comprising:
a robot comprising one or more motors configured to move an arm (see at least [32] and [0038] ); and
circuitry configured to:
control at least one motor of the one or more motors so that a first control quantity follows a first control command (see at least [0038], where “the control device 300 controls the position and the attitude of each movable part in the robot 100 by controlling the servo motor, based on the received information”; see also fig 7 and [0094], where velocity/acceleration of the robot, block S14 is first control quantity. The first control command include first control quantity), wherein the first control quantity represents a physical status of the arm (see at least [0048], where “receives information indicating operating status of a servo motor 130, such as a measured value of an amount of rotation from an encoder for detecting an amount of rotation of the servo motor 130, from the robot 100”; the first control quantity include velocity/acceleration of the robot arm which is a physical status of the arm e.g., amount of velocity of the arm represents the arm is static or moving or high speed moving or low speed moving); and
limit the first control command based on a second control quantity (see at least [0015], where “generate a modification instruction for causing the operation program to be modified in such a way as to increase a velocity or an acceleration related to the limiting condition within the limiting condition, when a velocity or an acceleration calculated by the calculation unit satisfies the limiting condition.”; see also fig 7, where modification content is acquired, S28 and modify the program if needed, S26. Limiting condition is interpreted as second control quantity. The control program is limited based on limiting condition. The velocity/acceleration of the robot (first control quantity) is limited or modified based on the limiting condition (second control quantity); See also [0097-98]).
Toumatsu does not disclose the following limitation:
second control quantity that is an integral of the first control quantity.
However, Nakada discloses a system wherein second control quantity that is an integral of the first control quantity (see at least [0084], where “the action plan unit 43 may limit an N times differential value (N is an integer) of the vehicle speed such as the acceleration or the jerk within the prescribed range. In order to effectively mitigate the impact caused by the contact between each wheel W and the vehicle stopper Z, the action plan unit 43 may limit the vehicle speed of the vehicle V and/or the N times differential value of the vehicle speed within the prescribed range.”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Toumatsu to incorporate the teachings of Nakada by including the above feature for providing rapid control values which is crucial for real time robot control.
Regarding claim 14, as best understood in view of indefiniteness rejection explained above, Toumatsu further discloses Toumatsu in view of Nakada discloses a robot system wherein the robot comprises a plurality of motors as the one or more motors (see citation on claim 1); and
the circuitry is configured to:
control the plurality of motors so that the first control quantity follows the first control command, wherein the first control quantity represents a physical status of an end portion of the arm (see citation on claim 1. The robot arm includes the end portion of the arm. So, the status of the robot arm includes the status of the end portion of the robot arm); and
limit the first control command based on a second control quantity that is an integral of the first control quantity (see citation on claim 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-13, 15-18 and 20 is/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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOHANA TANJU KHAYER whose telephone number is (408)918-7597. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 7 am-5.30 pm, PT.
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 on 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 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/SOHANA TANJU KHAYER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657