DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final Office Action on the merits in response to communications filed by Applicant on January 10th, 2025. Claims 1-9 are currently 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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments to the Claims, filed on February 6th, 2025, have been entered. Claims 3, 4, 7, and 9 are currently amended and pending, and claims 1-2, 5-6, and 8 are original, unamended, and pending. The amendments to the Specifications, filed on February 6th, 2025, have been entered. The amendments to the Abstract, filed on February 6th, 2025, have been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) filed on 01/10/2025 is/are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the Abstract includes legal phraseology, specifically “by means of force control” in line 7 of the Abstract. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 1 – force control unit, contact detection unit, force control parameter adjustment unit
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0071104 A1 ("Fukusen") in view of WO 2021/182243 A1 ("Yoshida").
Regarding claim 1, Fukusen teaches a robot controller comprising (Fukusen: Figure 2 control device 3, Abstract, “A method of adjusting an action parameter includes a positional posture determination step of making a robot execute a task a plurality of times in a plurality of positional postures different in positional posture of an object when starting the task to obtain evaluation values of the respective tasks, comparing the evaluation values of the tasks out of the evaluation values of the respective tasks with a reference evaluation value, and determining an evaluation positional posture from the positional postures in the tasks in which the evaluation value is no higher than the reference evaluation value, an updating step of making the robot operate with a tentative action parameter using the evaluation positional posture as a starting positional posture in the task to measure a time taken for the task or a vibration of the robot, and updating the tentative action parameter based on a measurement result, and a determination step of repeatedly performing the updating step until the time taken for the task or the vibration of the robot measured is converged to determine latest one of the tentative action parameters as an action parameter when actually performing the task.”, ¶ 0051, “Further, as shown in FIG. 2, the control device 3 has a target position setting section 3A, a drive control section 3B, a storage section 3C, and a parameter adjustment section 3D. The storage section 3C is constituted by, for example, a volatile memory such as a RAM (Random Access Memory), a nonvolatile memory such as a ROM (Read Only Memory), and a removable external storage device. The storage section 3C stores an operation program for making the robot 1 operate such as a program for executing the method of adjusting the action parameter according to the present disclosure.”):
a force control unit configured to execute force control, based on a detected value of an external force and a predetermined force control parameter (Fukusen: Figure 2, ¶ 0055, “Here, the control device 3 is capable of controlling the action of the robot 1 using force control and so on. The "force control" means control of an action of the robot 1 of changing a position of the end effector 20, namely a position of the tool center point TCP, and postures of the first arm 12 through the sixth arm 17 based on the detection result of the force detection section 19.”, ¶ 0056, “The force control includes, for example, force trigger control and impedance control. In the force trigger control, the force detection is performed by the force detection section 19, and the robot arm 10 is made to perform an action such as a displacement or a change in posture until a predetermined force is detected by the force detection section 19.”, ¶ 0057, “The impedance control includes imitation control. First, in a brief description, in the impedance control, the action of the robot arm 10 is controlled so as to keep the force applied to the tip portion of the robot arm 10 at a predetermined force as precisely as possible, namely so as to keep the force in a predetermined direction detected by the force detection section 19 at the target force fSt, as precisely as possible. Thus, for example, when the impedance control is performed on the robot arm 10, the robot arm 10 performs an action imitating an external force applied from the object or an operator with respect to the predetermined direction. It should be noted that the target force fSt, includes 0. For example, as one of the settings when performing the imitation action, it is possible to set the target value to "0." It should be noted that it is possible to set the target force fs, to a numerical value other than 0. It is possible for the operator to arbitrarily set the target force fSt.”, ¶ 0078, “Here, the operator is required to set appropriate action parameters before performing the task in accordance with the content of the task and the types of the work W1 and the work W2. The action parameters include the force control parameters, position control parameters, and so on. As described above, the force control parameters include the mass coefficient m, the viscosity coefficient d, the elastic coefficient k, the target force fs,, and so on. The position control parameters are parameters to be set when performing the position control, and include the speed, the acceleration, and so on of the tool center point TCP.”. The cited passages clearly teaches that the robot is configured to execute force control based on a detected force value and a force control parameter.);
a contact detection unit configured to be able to detect contact between a robot and an external environment, and execute predetermined control on the robot when the contact is detected (Fukusen: ¶ 0056, “The force control includes, for example, force trigger control and impedance control. In the force trigger control, the force detection is performed by the force detection section 19, and the robot arm 10 is made to perform an action such as a displacement or a change in posture until a predetermined force is detected by the force detection section 19.”, ¶ 0064, “The force control section 34 performs the impedance control. The impedance control is active impedance control which realizes an imaginary mechanical impedance with the motor M1 through the motor M6. The control device 3 performs such impedance control when performing direct teaching and a step in a contact state in which the end effector 20 receives a force from the work as the object such as a fitting task of the work, a screwing task, or a polishing task. It should be noted that besides such a step, by performing the impedance control when, for example, a human makes contact with the robot 1, it is possible to enhance the safety.”, ¶ 0066, “Further, in a step in a non-contact state in which the end effector 20 does not receive an external force, the control device 3 controls the motor M1 through the motor M6 with the rotational angles derived by a linear operation from the target positional posture S,. A mode in which the motor M1 through the motor M6 are controlled with the rotational angles derived by the linear operation from the target positional posture S, is referred to as a position control mode.”, ¶ 0067, “The control device 3 substitutes the target force fSt, and the acting force ft into the motion equation of the impedance control to thereby identify a force-derived correction value ΔS. The force-derived correction value ΔS means a magnitude of a displacement of the positional posture S which the tool center point TCP should make for dissolving a force deviation ΔfS(t) from the target force fS, when the tool center point TCP has received the mechanical impedance. The following formula (1) is the motion equation of the impedance control.”, ¶ 0073, “As described above, in the robotic system 100, during the execution of the force control, the correction value is obtained from the detection value of the force detection section 19, the force control parameters set in advance, and the target force fs, set in advance. This correction value means the force-derived correction value ΔS described above, and means a difference between the position at which the external force is received, and a position to which the tool center point TCP should be moved.”. The cited passages clearly shows that the force control is performed when the robot is in a contact state with an object. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize from the cited passages that this is clearly determined based on a detected external force.);
and a force control parameter adjustment unit configured to adjust the predetermined force control parameter by causing the robot to perform operations by the force control for a plurality of times (Fukusen: Figure 7, ¶ 0077, “As described later, the parameter adjustment section 3D shown in FIG. 2 adjusts the action parameters.”, ¶ 0078, “Here, the operator is required to set appropriate action parameters before performing the task in accordance with the content of the task and the types of the work W1 and the work W2. The action parameters include the force control parameters, position control parameters, and so on. As described above, the force control parameters include the mass coefficient m, the viscosity coefficient d, the elastic coefficient k, the target force fs,, and so on. The position control parameters are parameters to be set when performing the position control, and include the speed, the acceleration, and so on of the tool center point TCP.”, ¶ 0079, “By setting these to appropriate values, it is possible to set the mode of the robot arm 10 in operation to a mode suitable for the task, and thus, it is possible to perform an accurate task in a desired task time without applying an excessive load to the work W1 and the work W2.”, ¶ 0091, “Subsequently, in the step S103, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines the action parameters. It should be noted that in the step S103 in the first loop, the action parameters are determined as initial action parameters set in advance, namely tentative action parameters.”, ¶ 0092, “Subsequently, in the step S104, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines the evaluation positional posture. For example, it is possible to determine the evaluation positional posture in the order in which the evaluation positional posture A is determined in the first loop, the evaluation positional posture B is determined in the second loop, the evaluation positional posture C is determined in the third loop, and the evaluation positional posture D is determined in the fourth loop. It should be noted that this order is not a limitation.”, ¶ 0093, “Subsequently, in the step S105, the drive control section 3B moves the robot arm 10 to the evaluation positional posture determined in the step S104. Specifically, the robot arm 10 which grips the work W1 is driven so that the positional posture of the robot arm 10 becomes the evaluation positional posture determined in the step S104.”, ¶ 0094, “Then, in the step S106, the drive control section 3B makes the robot arm 10 execute a kinesthetic action. In other words, the robot arm 10 executes the designated task with the force control. Then, in the step S107, a success judgment of the kinesthetic action is performed. When it is determined successful in the step S107, the process proceeds to the step S108, and when it is determined unsuccessful in the step S107, the process proceeds to the step S103.”, ¶ 0095, “In the step S108, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines whether to terminate the task. The judgment in the present step is made based on whether the task has been performed in all of the four evaluation positional postures, namely whether or not the loop of the step S103 through the step S107 has been performed four times. When it is determined that the task is to be terminated in the step S108, the process proceeds to the step S109, and when it is determined that the task is not to be terminated in the step S108, the process proceeds to the step S104.”, ¶ 0096, “Then, in the step S109, the parameter adjustment section 3D performs an optimization of the force control parameters. Specifically, the evaluation values of the four tasks are obtained, and then the evaluation value of each of the tasks is compared to a reference evaluation value. Further, one positional posture is determined out of the positional postures described above in the task in which the evaluation value is no higher than the reference evaluation value.”, ¶ 0100, “Then, in the step S110, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines the action parameters suitable for the task which is executed using the positional posture selected in the step S109 as a start-up positional posture. In the present step, for example, the determination is made based on, for example, a table representing the relationship between the start-up positional posture and the action parameters, and a calibration curve.”, ¶ 0101, “Subsequently, in the step S111, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines a positional posture correction value. Specifically, an amount of the variation to be provided to the positional posture selected in the step S109 is determined, and then the evaluation positional posture is updated in the step S112. Such steps S111 and S112 correspond to an updating step.”, ¶ 0102, “Then, in the step S113, the drive control section 3B makes the robot arm 10 execute a kinesthetic action using the action parameters calculated with an optimization algorithm. In other words, the robot arm 10 executes the designated task with the force control. Then, in the step S114, a success judgment of the kinesthetic action is performed. When it is determined successful in the step S114, the process proceeds to the step S115, and when it is determined unsuccessful in the step S114, the process proceeds to the step S116.”, ¶ 0105, “It should be noted that in the step S113, when executing the kinesthetic action, the time necessary for the task or a vibration of the robot 1 is measured.”, ¶ 0106, “Then, in the step S116, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines the action parameters based on the time necessary for the task or the vibration of the robot 1 obtained in the step S113. In other words, the parameter adjustment section 3D updates the tentative action parameters based on the time necessary for the task or the vibration of the robot 1 thus measured. The determination in the present step is made based on a table representing the relationship between, for example, the time necessary for the task or the vibration of the robot 1 thus measured and the action parameters corresponding thereto. Then, the process returns to the step S113.”, ¶ 0107, “In the step S115, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines whether or not the optimization has been completed. The judgment in the present step is made based on the time necessary for the task thus measured or whether or not the vibration of the robot 1 has been converged. For example, when a state in which a difference between the time taken to execute the task n times and the time taken to execute the task n-1 times is no more than a predetermined value occurs a predetermined times in a row, it is possible to assume that the convergence is achieved.”, ¶ 0109, “When it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is completed, the solution is displayed to the user in the step S117 using, for example, the teaching device 4. It should be noted that when it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is not completed, the process returns to the step S111 to sequentially repeat the subsequent steps. Such steps S111 through S116 correspond to the determination step.”. The cited figure and passages describes the process by which the system is configured to optimize the parameters used to control a robot to perform a task, specifically the posture the robot is to take while performing the task and the force control parameters. First, the system determines the best posture for the robot when performing the task (i.e. steps S101-108, ¶ 0083-0095). The robot is configured to determine four possible posture for the robot when performing a task, cause the robot to move to each of the four postures, and determine an evaluation value at each of the four values. Then, once the robot has been moved to each of the four postures and an evaluation value for each has been determined, the system is configured to optimize the force control parameters (i.e. steps S109-S117, ¶0096-0109). The system is first configured to select one of the four posture based on the evaluation value of each posture (i.e. the posture with the lowest evaluation value that is also less than or equal to a reference evaluation value.). Then the robot is configured to cause the robot to move to the selected posture and attempt to perform the desired task. The robot then determines if the task was executed successfully, and if not, adjusts the force control parameters and repeats the execution of the task using the adjusted parameters. Then when the task has been successfully executed, the robot determines if the force control parameters have been optimized, and if not, repeats the process of having the robot move to the selected posture, performing the task under the newly adjusted force control parameters, and further adjusting the force control parameters. Once it is determined that the force control parameters have been optimized, the results are presented to a user on a display device.),
wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit performs an adjustment of the predetermined force control parameter (Fukusen: ¶ 0096, “Then, in the step S109, the parameter adjustment section 3D performs an optimization of the force control parameters. Specifically, the evaluation values of the four tasks are obtained, and then the evaluation value of each of the tasks is compared to a reference evaluation value. Further, one positional posture is determined out of the positional postures described above in the task in which the evaluation value is no higher than the reference evaluation value.”, ¶ 0102, “Then, in the step S113, the drive control section 3B makes the robot arm 10 execute a kinesthetic action using the action parameters calculated with an optimization algorithm. In other words, the robot arm 10 executes the designated task with the force control. Then, in the step S114, a success judgment of the kinesthetic action is performed. When it is determined successful in the step S114, the process proceeds to the step S115, and when it is determined unsuccessful in the step S114, the process proceeds to the step S116.”, ¶ 0106, “Then, in the step S116, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines the action parameters based on the time necessary for the task or the vibration of the robot 1 obtained in the step S113. In other words, the parameter adjustment section 3D updates the tentative action parameters based on the time necessary for the task or the vibration of the robot 1 thus measured. The determination in the present step is made based on a table representing the relationship between, for example, the time necessary for the task or the vibration of the robot 1 thus measured and the action parameters corresponding thereto. Then, the process returns to the step S113.”, ¶ 0107, “In the step S115, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines whether or not the optimization has been completed. The judgment in the present step is made based on the time necessary for the task thus measured or whether or not the vibration of the robot 1 has been converged. For example, when a state in which a difference between the time taken to execute the task n times and the time taken to execute the task n-1 times is no more than a predetermined value occurs a predetermined times in a row, it is possible to assume that the convergence is achieved.”, ¶ 0109, “When it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is completed, the solution is displayed to the user in the step S117 using, for example, the teaching device 4. It should be noted that when it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is not completed, the process returns to the step S111 to sequentially repeat the subsequent steps. Such steps S111 through S116 correspond to the determination step.”).
Fukusen does not teach wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit performs an adjustment of the predetermined force control parameter while adjusting sensitivity of contact detection by the contact detection unit.
Yoshida, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit performs an adjustment of the predetermined force control parameter while adjusting sensitivity of contact detection by the contact detection unit (Yoshida: Abstract, “Provided is a robot control device that can suppress the stoppage of operations due to the detection of a contact error. The robot control device controls a robot that implements welding in association with contact with a to-be-welded object, said device comprising: an action stoppage unit that stops the action of the robot if detected that the robot been subjected to an external force equal to or greater than a threshold; an instructing unit that instructs a welding power supply device to start welding; and a detection sensitivity adjustment unit that lowers the sensitivity at which an external force is detected at the action stoppage unit during a period of time from the point in time at which the instructing unit instructs the welding power supply device to start welding until a prescribed wait time has elapsed.”, ¶ 0013, “The robot 10 is equipped with a force detection unit 13. The force detection unit 13 is a device that detects external forces (force or torque) acting on the robot 10. As shown in Figure 1, the force detection unit 13 is provided on the base 14 that supports the arm portion 11. The external force acting on the base 14 corresponds to the external force acting on the robot 10. The force detection unit 13 transmits the magnitude of the external force acting on the robot 10 as a detected value to the robot control device 50.”, ¶ 0021, “If the operation stop unit 53 detects that the robot 10 has received an external force exceeding a threshold, it stops the operation of the robot 10 using the contact stop function. Specifically, the operation stop unit 53 compares the detected value (the magnitude of the external force received by the robot 10) transmitted from the force detection unit 13 with a preset threshold. If the detected value exceeds the threshold, it determines that the robot 10 has received an external force greater than or equal to the threshold and stops the operation of the robot 10. Furthermore, "determining" that the robot 10 has received an external force exceeding a threshold means that the operation stop unit 53 has "detected" that the robot 10 has received an external force exceeding a threshold. In the operation stop unit 53, the threshold value is changed by a sensitivity reduction instruction transmitted from the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 (described later). When the operation stop unit 53 receives a sensitivity reduction instruction from the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54, it executes control to change the threshold value from the normal value to a preset value. Furthermore, when the operation stop unit 53 receives a sensitivity reduction release instruction from the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54, it executes control to return the threshold value to its normal value.”, ¶ 0022, “The detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 performs control to reduce the sensitivity of the operation stop unit 53 for detecting external forces from the time the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding until a predetermined waiting time has elapsed. Specifically, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding. Furthermore, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction release instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when a predetermined waiting time has elapsed.”, ¶ 0023, “This allows the sensitivity of the operation stop unit 53 in detecting external forces to be reduced from the time the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding until a predetermined waiting time has elapsed. Furthermore, "reducing the sensitivity for detecting external forces" means that the threshold value compared with the detected value in the operation stop unit 53 is made larger than normal. By setting the threshold higher than usual, for example, when the robot 10 performs various operations during the arc welding initiation process, the operation stop unit 53 becomes less likely to detect that it has received an external force”, ¶ 0026, “Next, a specific example of the process used in the robot control device 50 of this embodiment to suppress the stopping of the robot 10 due to false contact detection will be described. Figure 2 is a flowchart showing the processing procedure of the contact false detection suppression program executed in the robot control device 50. In step S101 shown in Figure 2, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 (robot control device 50) determines whether or not the instruction unit 52 has instructed the welding power supply device 20 to start welding. In this embodiment, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 determines that the instruction unit 52 has instructed the welding power supply unit 20 to start welding when the instruction unit 52 notifies the welding power supply unit 20 of a welding start signal at the start of arc welding.”, ¶ 0027, “In step S101, if the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 determines that the instruction unit 52 has instructed the welding power supply device 20 to start welding, the process proceeds to step S102. On the other hand, if the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 determines in step S101 that the instruction unit 52 has not instructed the welding power supply device 20 to start welding, the process returns to step S101.”, ¶ 0028, “In step S102 (step S101: YES), the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction instruction to the operation stop unit 53. Upon receiving a sensitivity reduction instruction, the operation stop unit 53 changes the threshold level to a preset value. As a result, for example, when the robot 10 performs various operations during the arc welding initiation process, it becomes less likely that the operation stop unit 53 will determine that it has received an external force. This makes it less likely for the contact stop function to activate at the start of arc welding.”, ¶ 0031, “In step S104 (step S103: YES), the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction release instruction to the operation stop unit 53. Upon receiving the instruction to release the reduced sensitivity, the operation stop unit 53 returns the threshold value to its normal value. As a result, if the robot 10 is subjected to an external force exceeding a certain level, the contact stop function of the operation stop unit 53 will work properly, and the operation of the robot 10 will stop. Once the process in step S104 is executed, the process in this flowchart ends.”. The cited passages clearly teaches that the system is configured to dynamically change a force threshold value used to determine if contact between the robot and an object has occurred. Additionally, the cited passages clearly refers to the force threshold used to determine if contact has occurred as the “sensitivity”.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine robot controller taught in Fukusen with wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit performs an adjustment of the predetermined force control parameter while adjusting sensitivity of contact detection by the contact detection unit taught in Yoshida with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because such a method of dynamically changing the force detection sensitivity (i.e. the force threshold used to determine is contact has occurred) prevents false contact detections in situation where the robot experiences high contact forces due to the current task being performed. By preventing such false contact detections, the robot is able to continue performing its current task (Yoshida: ¶ 0003, “In recent years, so-called collaborative robots (hereinafter also referred to as "robots"), which can perform various tasks in cooperation with humans without safety fences, are becoming increasingly widespread in the manufacturing sector. Many robots of this type are equipped with a contact stop function that stops operation if an external force exceeding a certain level is detected, for safety reasons (see, for example, Patent Document 1).”, ¶ 0004, “Robots used for arc welding may be subjected to external forces when performing the movements necessary for arc welding. Some of the external forces that occur at the start of arc welding are unlikely to pose a safety problem for robots. For example, while the arc discharge is not occurring smoothly and the wire is being continuously supplied, a reaction force can be considered from the workpiece due to contact with the welding wire during the retry operation described later. However, even if there are no safety issues, robots are subjected to external forces above a certain level, which can cause the contact stop function to activate and halt their work. In the following, "contact false detection" refers to the detection of an external force exceeding a certain level due to contact that is not considered to pose a safety risk.”, ¶ 0007, “According to the present invention, a robot control device can be provided that can suppress the cessation of work due to false contact detection.”).
Regarding claim 2, Fukusen in view of Yoshida teaches wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit reduces the sensitivity of contact detection when the adjustment of the force control parameter fails (Fukusen: ¶ 0102, “Then, in the step S113, the drive control section 3B makes the robot arm 10 execute a kinesthetic action using the action parameters calculated with an optimization algorithm. In other words, the robot arm 10 executes the designated task with the force control. Then, in the step S114, a success judgment of the kinesthetic action is performed. When it is determined successful in the step S114, the process proceeds to the step S115, and when it is determined unsuccessful in the step S114, the process proceeds to the step S116.”, ¶ 0107, “In the step S115, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines whether or not the optimization has been completed. The judgment in the present step is made based on the time necessary for the task thus measured or whether or not the vibration of the robot 1 has been converged. For example, when a state in which a difference between the time taken to execute the task n times and the time taken to execute the task n-1 times is no more than a predetermined value occurs a predetermined times in a row, it is possible to assume that the convergence is achieved.”, ¶ 0109, “When it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is completed, the solution is displayed to the user in the step S117 using, for example, the teaching device 4. It should be noted that when it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is not completed, the process returns to the step S111 to sequentially repeat the subsequent steps. Such steps S111 through S116 correspond to the determination step.”, Yoshida: ¶ 0022, “The detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 performs control to reduce the sensitivity of the operation stop unit 53 for detecting external forces from the time the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding until a predetermined waiting time has elapsed. Specifically, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding. Furthermore, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction release instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when a predetermined waiting time has elapsed.”, ¶ 0023, “This allows the sensitivity of the operation stop unit 53 in detecting external forces to be reduced from the time the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding until a predetermined waiting time has elapsed. Furthermore, "reducing the sensitivity for detecting external forces" means that the threshold value compared with the detected value in the operation stop unit 53 is made larger than normal. By setting the threshold higher than usual, for example, when the robot 10 performs various operations during the arc welding initiation process, the operation stop unit 53 becomes less likely to detect that it has received an external force”),
and repeats performing an adjustment of the force control parameter until an adjustment of the force control parameter succeeds (Fukusen: ¶ 0107, “In the step S115, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines whether or not the optimization has been completed. The judgment in the present step is made based on the time necessary for the task thus measured or whether or not the vibration of the robot 1 has been converged. For example, when a state in which a difference between the time taken to execute the task n times and the time taken to execute the task n-1 times is no more than a predetermined value occurs a predetermined times in a row, it is possible to assume that the convergence is achieved.”, ¶ 0109, “When it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is completed, the solution is displayed to the user in the step S117 using, for example, the teaching device 4. It should be noted that when it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is not completed, the process returns to the step S111 to sequentially repeat the subsequent steps. Such steps S111 through S116 correspond to the determination step.”).
Fukusen teaches a method of optimizing the force control parameters used to control a robot to perform a task. The method is configured to repeatedly cause the robot to perform the desired task, determine if the task was successfully executed and if not, update the control parameters, and repeat this process until such a time that the force control parameters are considered to be optimized. Yoshida teaches a method of dynamically changing the force detection threshold of a robot when the robot is performing a task such that false contact detections are prevented, allowing the robot to continue working. Fukusen is already configured to iteratively attempt to optimize the force control parameters of the robot, detect if contact has occurred based on an applied force exceeding a threshold, as well as determine if the execution of the task was successful when performing the optimization of the force control parameters. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to modify the method taught in Fukusen such that, when the force parameters have not been successfully optimized, the method changes the force sensitivity as taught in Yoshida according to methods known in the art. Therefore, the combination of Fukusen in view of Yoshida teaches the limitation “wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit reduces the sensitivity of contact detection when the adjustment of the force control parameter fails”.
Regarding claim 3, Fukusen in view of Yoshida teaches wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit records the sensitivity of contact detection at a time of success of an adjustment of the force control parameter (Fukusen: ¶ 0102, “Then, in the step S113, the drive control section 3B makes the robot arm 10 execute a kinesthetic action using the action parameters calculated with an optimization algorithm. In other words, the robot arm 10 executes the designated task with the force control. Then, in the step S114, a success judgment of the kinesthetic action is performed. When it is determined successful in the step S114, the process proceeds to the step S115, and when it is determined unsuccessful in the step S114, the process proceeds to the step S116.”, ¶ 0107, “In the step S115, the parameter adjustment section 3D determines whether or not the optimization has been completed. The judgment in the present step is made based on the time necessary for the task thus measured or whether or not the vibration of the robot 1 has been converged. For example, when a state in which a difference between the time taken to execute the task n times and the time taken to execute the task n-1 times is no more than a predetermined value occurs a predetermined times in a row, it is possible to assume that the convergence is achieved.”, ¶ 0109, “When it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is completed, the solution is displayed to the user in the step S117 using, for example, the teaching device 4. It should be noted that when it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is not completed, the process returns to the step S111 to sequentially repeat the subsequent steps. Such steps S111 through S116 correspond to the determination step.”, Yoshida: ¶ 0022, “The detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 performs control to reduce the sensitivity of the operation stop unit 53 for detecting external forces from the time the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding until a predetermined waiting time has elapsed. Specifically, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding. Furthermore, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction release instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when a predetermined waiting time has elapsed.”, ¶ 0023, “This allows the sensitivity of the operation stop unit 53 in detecting external forces to be reduced from the time the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding until a predetermined waiting time has elapsed. Furthermore, "reducing the sensitivity for detecting external forces" means that the threshold value compared with the detected value in the operation stop unit 53 is made larger than normal. By setting the threshold higher than usual, for example, when the robot 10 performs various operations during the arc welding initiation process, the operation stop unit 53 becomes less likely to detect that it has received an external force”).
Fukusen teaches a method of optimizing the force control parameters used to control a robot to perform a task. The method is configured to repeatedly cause the robot to perform the desired task, determine if the task was successfully executed and if not, update the control parameters, and repeat this process until such a time that the force control parameters are considered to be optimized. The method is further configured to store these optimized force control parameters. Yoshida teaches a method of dynamically changing the force detection threshold of a robot when the robot is performing a task such that false contact detections are prevented, allowing the robot to continue working. Fukusen is already configured to iteratively attempt to optimize the force control parameters of the robot, detect if contact has occurred based on an applied force exceeding a threshold, as well as store the optimized force control parameters. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to modify the method taught in Fukusen such that, when the optimized force parameters are stored, the method stores the adjusted force sensitivity as taught in Yoshida according to methods known in the art. Therefore, the combination of Fukusen in view of Yoshida teaches the limitation “wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit records the sensitivity of contact detection at a time of success of an adjustment of the force control parameter”.
Regarding claim 4, Fukusen in view of Yoshida teaches wherein after success of an adjustment of the force control parameter, the force control parameter adjustment unit returns the sensitivity of contact detection to an original state before the adjustment of the force control parameter is performed (Yoshida: ¶ 0022, “The detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 performs control to reduce the sensitivity of the operation stop unit 53 for detecting external forces from the time the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding until a predetermined waiting time has elapsed. Specifically, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding. Furthermore, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction release instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when a predetermined waiting time has elapsed.”, ¶ 0031, “In step S104 (step S103: YES), the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction release instruction to the operation stop unit 53. Upon receiving the instruction to release the reduced sensitivity, the operation stop unit 53 returns the threshold value to its normal value. As a result, if the robot 10 is subjected to an external force exceeding a certain level, the contact stop function of the operation stop unit 53 will work properly, and the operation of the robot 10 will stop. Once the process in step S104 is executed, the process in this flowchart ends.”. The cited passages clearly teaches returning the force sensitivity to its original value based on the operation of the robot.).
Regarding claim 5, Fukusen in view of Yoshida teaches wherein when the force control is executed, the force control unit changes the sensitivity of contact detection to the recorded sensitivity of contact detection (Fukusen: ¶ 0055, “Here, the control device 3 is capable of controlling the action of the robot 1 using force control and so on. The "force control" means control of an action of the robot 1 of changing a position of the end effector 20, namely a position of the tool center point TCP, and postures of the first arm 12 through the sixth arm 17 based on the detection result of the force detection section 19.”, ¶ 0056, “The force control includes, for example, force trigger control and impedance control. In the force trigger control, the force detection is performed by the force detection section 19, and the robot arm 10 is made to perform an action such as a displacement or a change in posture until a predetermined force is detected by the force detection section 19.” Yoshida: ¶ 0022, “The detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 performs control to reduce the sensitivity of the operation stop unit 53 for detecting external forces from the time the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding until a predetermined waiting time has elapsed. Specifically, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding. Furthermore, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction release instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when a predetermined waiting time has elapsed.”, ¶ 0027, “In step S101, if the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 determines that the instruction unit 52 has instructed the welding power supply device 20 to start welding, the process proceeds to step S102. On the other hand, if the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 determines in step S101 that the instruction unit 52 has not instructed the welding power supply device 20 to start welding, the process returns to step S101.”, ¶ 0028, “In step S102 (step S101: YES), the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction instruction to the operation stop unit 53. Upon receiving a sensitivity reduction instruction, the operation stop unit 53 changes the threshold level to a preset value. As a result, for example, when the robot 10 performs various operations during the arc welding initiation process, it becomes less likely that the operation stop unit 53 will determine that it has received an external force. This makes it less likely for the contact stop function to activate at the start of arc welding.”. The cited passages clearly teaches changing the force sensitivity when the robot begins execution of an operation.).
Regarding claim 6, Fukusen in view of Yoshida teaches wherein after execution of the force control, the force control unit returns the sensitivity of the robot to a state before execution of the force control (Yoshida: ¶ 0022, “The detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 performs control to reduce the sensitivity of the operation stop unit 53 for detecting external forces from the time the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding until a predetermined waiting time has elapsed. Specifically, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when the instruction unit 52 instructs the welding power supply device 20 to start arc welding. Furthermore, the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction release instruction to the operation stop unit 53 when a predetermined waiting time has elapsed.”, ¶ 0031, “In step S104 (step S103: YES), the detection sensitivity adjustment unit 54 transmits a sensitivity reduction release instruction to the operation stop unit 53. Upon receiving the instruction to release the reduced sensitivity, the operation stop unit 53 returns the threshold value to its normal value. As a result, if the robot 10 is subjected to an external force exceeding a certain level, the contact stop function of the operation stop unit 53 will work properly, and the operation of the robot 10 will stop. Once the process in step S104 is executed, the process in this flowchart ends.”. The cited passages clearly teaches that the robot is configured to return the force sensitivity to its original value after the operation the robot is performing ends.).
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0071104 A1 ("Fukusen") in view of WO 2021/182243 A1 ("Yoshida") in further view of JP 2016159367 A ("Kuroshita").
Regarding claim 7, Fukusen in further view of Yoshida teaches wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit displays a user interface screen for displaying at a time of success of the adjustment of the force control parameter (Fukusen: ¶ 0109, “When it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is completed, the solution is displayed to the user in the step S117 using, for example, the teaching device 4. It should be noted that when it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is not completed, the process returns to the step S111 to sequentially repeat the subsequent steps. Such steps S111 through S116 correspond to the determination step.”. The cited passage clearly shows that the optimized posture and force control parameters are presented to a user on a display once the optimization process has finished.).
Fukusen in view of Yoshida does not teach wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit displays a user interface screen for displaying the sensitivity of contact detection at a time of success of the adjustment of the force control parameter.
Kuroshita, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit displays a user interface screen for displaying the sensitivity of contact detection at a time of success of the adjustment of the force control parameter (Kuroshita: ¶ 0014, “Figure 1 shows an example of the configuration of a robot system 1 equipped with a robot control device 10 according to one embodiment. The robot system 1 comprises a robot control device 10, a robot 100 controlled by the robot control device 10, and a teaching control panel 200 connected to the robot control device 10. Robot 100 is a multi-joint robot having any known configuration.”, ¶ 0015, “The teaching control panel 200 includes a known display 202 such as a liquid crystal display and a known input device 204 such as a keyboard. The display 202 may be a touch panel that functions as an input means. The input device 204 is used to input and edit data and parameters. Furthermore, the input device 204 may be used to manually input commands to the robot 100 when performing manual feeding operations.”, ¶ 0027, “Figure 3 is a functional block diagram of a robot control device 10 according to one embodiment. The robot control device 10 includes a force detection unit 31, an operation stop unit 32, a counting unit 33, a determination unit 34, and a limiting unit 35.”, ¶ 0028, “The force detection unit 31 works in cooperation with the force sensor 106 to detect external forces acting on the robot 100. The force sensors 106 are provided, for example, on each joint axis of the robot 100. The force detection unit 31 acquires the force acting on the joint axis to which the force sensor 106 is attached.”, ¶ 0029, “The operation stop unit 32 stops the robot 100 via the host CPU 11 or servo circuit 20 when the force detected by the force detection unit 31 exceeds a predetermined threshold.”, ¶ 0037, “In the illustrated example, the teaching control panel 200 is configured to allow individual parameter setting for joint axes J1 to J6.”, ¶ 0042, “The "collision" item is used in the operation stop unit 32 to set a threshold value that is used for comparison with the force detected by the force detection unit 31. The operation stop unit 32 stops the robot 100 when the force detection value exceeds a threshold, regardless of whether the output limit or speed limit of the motor 102 is enabled or disabled. The input values shown in Figure 5 represent the threshold values that should be used when output limiting is enabled, expressed as percentages, relative to the reference threshold value used when output limiting is disabled. In this way, by setting a low collision detection threshold, the robot 100 can be stopped quickly if it comes into contact with an object or worker in its vicinity. Therefore, serious accidents can be prevented.”. The cited passages clearly teaches displaying, to a user, the force threshold (i.e. the sensitivity) used to determine if a collision has occurred and allowing a user to adjust the threshold value.).
Fukusen in view of Yoshida teaches a robot controller that performs automatic adjustment of the force control parameters and the force sensitivity used to determine if contact has occurred between the robot and an object. The system additionally comprises a display to display various information to the user, such as the optimized force control parameters, once the optimization process has finished. Fukusen in view of Yoshida does not teach or suggest wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit displays a user interface screen for displaying the sensitivity of contact detection at a time of success of the adjustment of the force control parameter. Kuroshita teaches wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit displays a user interface screen for displaying the sensitivity of contact detection at a time of success of the adjustment of the force control parameter. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to have modified the system taught in Fukusen in view of Yoshida with wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit displays a user interface screen for displaying the sensitivity of contact detection at a time of success of the adjustment of the force control parameter taught in Kuroshita. Furthermore the system taught in Fukusen is already configured to determine if contact has occurred based on the applied force and a force threshold, dynamically adjusting the force threshold when the robot performs an operation, and display, to a user, a the force control parameters after the optimization ends. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to modify the system taught in Fukusen in view of Yoshida such that the system displays the force threshold to the user after the optimization ends as taught in Kuroshita according to methods known in the art. Such a modification would not have changed or introduced new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required. The combination would have yielded the predictable result of a robot controller comprising: wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit displays a user interface screen for displaying the sensitivity of contact detection at a time of success of the adjustment of the force control parameter.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system taught in Fukusen in view of Yoshida with wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit displays a user interface screen for displaying the sensitivity of contact detection at a time of success of the adjustment of the force control parameter taught in Kuroshita with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Regarding claim 8, Fukusen in view of Yoshida in further view of Kuroshita teaches wherein the user interface screen is configured to accept a user operation of adjusting the sensitivity of contact detection (Kuroshita: ¶ 0015, “The teaching control panel 200 includes a known display 202 such as a liquid crystal display and a known input device 204 such as a keyboard. The display 202 may be a touch panel that functions as an input means. The input device 204 is used to input and edit data and parameters. Furthermore, the input device 204 may be used to manually input commands to the robot 100 when performing manual feeding operations.”, ¶ 0037, “In the illustrated example, the teaching control panel 200 is configured to allow individual parameter setting for joint axes J1 to J6.”, ¶ 0042, “The "collision" item is used in the operation stop unit 32 to set a threshold value that is used for comparison with the force detected by the force detection unit 31. The operation stop unit 32 stops the robot 100 when the force detection value exceeds a threshold, regardless of whether the output limit or speed limit of the motor 102 is enabled or disabled. The input values shown in Figure 5 represent the threshold values that should be used when output limiting is enabled, expressed as percentages, relative to the reference threshold value used when output limiting is disabled. In this way, by setting a low collision detection threshold, the robot 100 can be stopped quickly if it comes into contact with an object or worker in its vicinity. Therefore, serious accidents can be prevented.”),
and an instruction for performing an adjustment of the force control parameter by the force control parameter adjustment unit again with the sensitivity of contact detection adjusted by the user operation (Fukusen: ¶ 0083, “In the step Sl0l, there is performed setting of a component variation, namely setting of a variation in positional posture of the work W1 at the start-up of the task. For example, the user inputs such an ideal positional posture of the work W1 at the start-up of the task as shown in FIG. 3, and a range of the variation in the positional posture. The input is performed using, for example, the teaching device 4.”, ¶ 0108, “In the present step, the user inputs the component variation for each of the axes, and the evaluation positional posture is determined based on the range of the variation.”, ¶ 0109, “When it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is completed, the solution is displayed to the user in the step S117 using, for example, the teaching device 4. It should be noted that when it has been determined in the step S115 that the optimization is not completed, the process returns to the step S111 to sequentially repeat the subsequent steps. Such steps S111 through S116 correspond to the determination step.”).
Fukusen in view of Yoshida teaches a method of optimizing the force control parameters used to control a robot to perform a task. The method is configured to have a user input various parameters into a display and the begin the optimization of the force control parameters base on the inputted values. Kuroshita teaches a method for controlling a robot, wherein a user can input various parameters for controlling the robot into a display. Said parameters include the force threshold used to determine if contact between the robot and an object has occurred. As such, because the method taught in Fukusen in view of Yoshida is already configured to allow the user to input control parameters into a display, perform the optimization based on the parameters input by the user, and is configured with a force threshold used to determine the occurrence of contact, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to modify the system taught in Fukusen in view of Yoshida with the method of allowing the user to adjust the value of the force threshold used determine if contact has occurred taught in Kuroshita according to methods known in the art. Therefore, the combination of Fukusen in view of Yoshida in further view of Kuroshita teaches the limitations of claim 8.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0071104 A1 ("Fukusen") in view of WO 2021/182243 A1 ("Yoshida") in further view of JP 2015155134 A ("Sato").
Regarding claim 9, Fukusen in view of Yoshida does not teach wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit sends a signal for adjusting brightness of a sensitivity indicator provided on the robot according to the sensitivity of contact detection being currently applied to the robot.
Sato, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit sends a signal for adjusting brightness of a sensitivity indicator provided on the robot according to the sensitivity of contact detection being currently applied to the robot (Sato: Figure 1, ¶ 0037, “The portion that protrudes upward from the torso 10 and corresponds to the head is equipped with an electronic camera 20 having a CCD (Charge Coupled Device), CMOS (Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor), etc., and a signal light 22. The electronic camera 20 can, for example, take images of a workbench or the like. The signal light 22 has LEDs that emit red light, yellow light, and blue light, respectively, and these LEDs are appropriately selected to light up according to the current state of the robot 2.”. The cited figure and passage teaches a signal light on the robot used to indicate a state of the robot.).
Fukusen in view of Yoshida teaches a method of optimizing the force control parameters of a robot. The method is configured to display the optimized force control parameters and other information to the user on a display after the optimization process is over. Fukusen in view of Yoshida does not teach wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit sends a signal for adjusting brightness of a sensitivity indicator provided on the robot according to the sensitivity of contact detection being currently applied to the robot. Sato teaches wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit sends a signal for adjusting brightness of a sensitivity indicator provided on the robot according to the sensitivity of contact detection being currently applied to the robot. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to have modified the system taught in Fukusen in view of Yoshida with wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit sends a signal for adjusting brightness of a sensitivity indicator provided on the robot according to the sensitivity of contact detection being currently applied to the robot taught in Sato. Furthermore, the system taught in Fukusen in view of Yoshida is already configured to display the optimized force control parameters and other information to the user on a display and is configured with a force threshold used to determine if contact has occurred that can be dynamically changed. As such, one of ordinary kill in the art would have been able to modify the system taught in Fukusen in view of Yoshida with the signal light on the robot that changes to reflect taught in Sato such that the light changes based on the changes to the force threshold according to methods known in the art. Such a modification would not have changed or introduced new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required. The combination would have yielded the predictable result of a robot controller comprising: wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit sends a signal for adjusting brightness of a sensitivity indicator provided on the robot according to the sensitivity of contact detection being currently applied to the robot.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the system taught in Fukusen in view of Yoshida with wherein the force control parameter adjustment unit sends a signal for adjusting brightness of a sensitivity indicator provided on the robot according to the sensitivity of contact detection being currently applied to the robot taught in Sato with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Noah W Stiebritz whose telephone number is (571)272-3414. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 7-5 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, Ramon Mercado can be reached at (571) 270-5744. 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.
/N.W.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3658
/Ramon A. Mercado/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights