DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3 appears to contain a typographical error and reads, in relevant part “… the receiving unit receives a plurality of contact operation parameter sets, each including the start portion …” Examiner believes the preceding excerpt should read as follows: “… the receiving unit receives a plurality of contact operation parameter sets, each including the start position …”. Appropriate correction is required.
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: “receiving unit” and “generation unit” introduced in in claims 1 and 8, and “control unit” in claim 9. Per paragraph [0020] of applicant’s specification, the above limitations shall be construed as generic processing equipment executing computer instructions in tandem with memory storage devices, input devices, and display means typical of general-purpose computers.
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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis – Step 1
Claim 1 is directed to an apparatus (i.e., a machine). Therefore, claim 1 is within at least one of the four statutory categories
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes. Independent claim 1 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below) and will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection. Claim 1 recites:
A program generation apparatus for generating a robot program for causing a robot to execute a contact operation for contacting a workpiece stacked in bulk in a container, comprising:
Receiving unit configured to receive, on a workpiece coordinate system, a start position and a start posture for starting the contact operation, and a movement amount and a posture change amount of the contact operation; and
A generation unit configured to generate the robot program for a target workpiece in the container, based on the received start position, start posture, movement amount, and posture change amount.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers performance of the limitation in the human mind. Specifically, the aspect of “generate the robot program …” encompasses a user observing an initial position and posture, noting necessary changes to said position and posture, and writing instructions for executing the necessary changes. Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, the additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
A program generation apparatus for generating a robot program for causing a robot to execute a contact operation for contacting a workpiece stacked in bulk in a container, comprising:
receiving unit configured to receive, on a workpiece coordinate system, a start position and a start posture for starting the contact operation, and a movement amount and a posture change amount of the contact operation; and
a generation unit configured to generate the robot program for a target workpiece in the container, based on the received start position, start posture, movement amount, and posture change amount.
For the following reason(s), the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding the additional limitations of a “receiving unit” and “a generation unit,” the examiner submits that these limitations are an attempt to generally link additional elements to a technological environment. In particular, the receiving and generating is recited at a high level of generality and merely automates the receiving and generating steps, therefore acting as a generic computer to perform the abstract idea. The receiving unit and generation unit are claimed generically and are operating in their ordinary capacity and do not use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. The additional limitation is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a computer (receiving unit and generation unit; see claim interpretation heading above).
Regarding the additional limitations of “receive, on a workpiece coordinate system, a start position and a start posture for starting the contact operation, and a movement amount and a posture change amount of the contact operation,” the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities that merely use a computer (vehicle controller) to perform the process. As stated above, the receiving step is recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general means of gathering position and posture information for use in the generating step), and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of extra-solution activity.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05). Accordingly, the additional limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
Regarding Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, representative independent claim 1 does not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a “receiving unit” and a “generating unit” to perform the receiving and generating steps amounts to nothing more than applying the exception using a generic computer component. Generally applying an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. And as discussed above, the additional limitation of “receiving …” amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity.
Further, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. The additional limitations of “receiving …” are well-understood, route, and conventional activities because the specification states that the components performing these activities are no more than general-purpose computing components operating in their normal capacity.
Dependent claim 2 elaborates on the data gathering (receiving) steps of claim 1 and does not incorporate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Dependent claims 3-4 elaborates on the abstract idea (generating) and data gathering (receiving) steps of claim 1 and do not incorporate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Dependent claim 5 introduces another data gathering step and does not incorporate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Dependent claims 6-7 introduces new limitations to the abstract idea and introduce additional data gathering steps and do not incorporate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Independent claim 9 claims subject matter substantially similar to claim 1, but in the form of a non-transitory storage medium, and is not patent eligible for the same reasons outlined above with respect to claim 1.
EXAMINER NOTE: Claim 8 is not rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because claim 8 includes a step of controlling the robot, thus incorporating the abstract idea into a practical application. If applicant were to similarly amend claim 1 and claim 9, the rejections may be overcome.
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) 1-3, 5, and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimodaira (US 20180250822 A1) in view of Sugiyama (US-20200147804-A1).
Claim 1
Shimodaira teaches
a receiving unit
(Shimodaira - [0016] According to the robot setting apparatus related to a seventh aspect, in addition to any one of the configurations, the robot setting apparatus may further include a search model registration unit that registers any one of the fundamental direction images as a search model for performing a three-dimensional search for specifying a position and an attitude of each workpiece on a plurality of workpiece groups loaded in bulk. With this configuration, a search model used to perform a three-dimensional search is registered in common to a fundamental direction image for designating a grip position of a workpiece model, and thus a user can achieve labor-saving for setting work. )
configured to receive, on a workpiece coordinate system,
(Shimodaira - [0294] … The origin of the search model may be the centroid of the workpiece model CWM or a center coordinate of CAD data as described above.)
a start position and a start posture for starting the contact operation,
(Shimodaira - [0294] … Grip attitude coordinate information 153 defining a grip attitude is displayed in the operation field 142. Here, position parameters X, Y, Z, R.sub.X, R.sub.Y and R.sub.Z displayed as the grip attitude coordinate information 153 indicate data of a position and an attitude of the end effector model EEM for the origin of the search model.)
Regarding the limitations of
receive … a movement amount and a posture change amount of the contact operation; and
Shimodaira indicates that the picked workpieces are placed at a predetermined position and orientation, which indicates a change in position and posture.
(Shimodaira - [0234] As illustrated in FIG. 1, a plurality of workpieces WK are stored in the storage container BX such as a returnable box at random. … In other words, the robot controller 6 specifies a picking target workpiece WK with the sensor unit 2, and controls an operation of the robot such that the end effector EET grips the workpiece WK, and places the workpiece WK at a placement position at a predetermined reference attitude, and then the end effector EET is opened.)
Shimodaira further teaches
A generation unit configured to
generate the robot program for a target workpiece in the container, based on the received start position, start posture, movement amount, and posture change amount.
(Shimodaira - [0010] According to a first aspect of the present invention, there is provided a robot setting apparatus controlling an operation of a robot performing a bin picking operation of sequentially taking out a plurality of workpieces stacked in a work space with an end effector provided at a tip of an arm portion of the robot, the robot setting apparatus including a workpiece model registration unit that registers a workpiece model indicating a three-dimensional shape of a workpiece; … a positioning unit that locates a position and an attitude of the workpiece model on a virtual three-dimensional space displayed on the display unit; and a grip position specifying unit that displays at least three height images in which a workpiece model positioned by the positioning unit is viewed from respective axis directions of three axes orthogonal to each other on the virtual three-dimensional space on the display unit as fundamental direction images, and specifies a grip position at which a workpiece model indicated by at least one of the displayed fundamental direction images is gripped by an end effector for the fundamental direction image. With this configuration, … a user can perform a grip position setting work on any fundamental direction image for which a grip position is easily set and can thus easily perform work, troublesome in the related art, of setting a grip position at which a workpiece is gripped by an end effector for a three-dimensional workpiece.
[0447] In the above-described way, the calculation unit 10 in FIG. 6 determines the presence or absence of a grip solution in which a workpiece can be gripped. In a case where a grip solution is obtained, an instruction is given to the robot controller 6 such that the workpiece is gripped by an end effector at a determined grip position. Thus, the robot controller 6 controls the end effector to pick the workpiece as instructed.)
Returning to the previous limitations of
receive … a movement amount and a posture change amount of the contact operation; and
Shimodaira may not explicitly teach a movement amount and a posture change amount. However, it is widely known in the art to express movement of a robot in terms of a difference in position and posture, as evidenced by Sugiyama.
(Sugiyama - [0060] Fig. 6 is a perspective view illustrating the target position Pt, a temporary target position Pt′, the target direction Dt, a temporary target direction Dt′, distance difference data ΔPt, posture difference data ΔDt, the current position Pc, and the current direction Dc. The movement control unit 313 may determine the target position Pt and the target direction Dt by the following operation. That is, the data storage unit 331 stores the distance difference data ΔPt and the posture difference data ΔDt. movement control unit 313 sets, for example, the target position Pt and the target direction Dt in a previous time step as the temporary target position Pt′ and the temporary target direction Dt′, and can calculate the target position Pt based on the temporary target position Pt′, the distance difference data ΔPt, and the posture difference data ΔDt and calculate the target direction Dt based on the temporary target direction Dt′ and the posture difference data ΔDt.)
Sugiyama further teaches
A generation unit configured to
generate the robot program for a target workpiece in the container, based on the received start position, start posture, movement amount, and posture change amount.
(Sugiyama - [0080] Next, the movement control unit 313 functions as the command value calculation unit 313c, and calculates a command value to operate the actuator 113 such that the positional deviation and the directional deviation are reduced (S1109))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Shimodaira's programming means with Sugiyama's teaching of expressing a destination in terms of a difference relative to a previous position and posture. The specification of a predetermined location and posture in absolute terms is functionally equivalent to expressing the same location and posture in terms of how different it is from another location and posture. In an analogous example, a pedestrian with a map could navigate to an intersection given the street names (coordinates) just as easily as they could find the same intersection knowing that it lies two blocks north and three blocks east of their current location (change amounts).
Claim 2
The combination of Shimodaira and Sugiyama teaches the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. As shown above with respect to claim 1, the cited combination also teaches
wherein the receiving unit
receives positions on three orthogonal axes of the workpiece coordinate system as the start position,
receives rotation angles around the three orthogonal axes as the start posture,
(Shimodaira - [0294] … Grip attitude coordinate information 153 defining a grip attitude is displayed in the operation field 142. Here, position parameters X, Y, Z, R.sub.X, R.sub.Y and R.sub.Z displayed as the grip attitude coordinate information 153 indicate data of a position and an attitude of the end effector model EEM for the origin of the search model.)
receives movement amounts along the three orthogonal axes as the movement amount,
and receives rotation amounts around the three orthogonal axes as the posture change amount.
EXAMINER NOTE: In light of the combination presented in the rejection of claim 1, it is apparent that the cited combination anticipates the movment amounts and rotation amounts in three orthogonal axes, as Shimodaira's coordinate systems, positions, and rotations all account for three-dimensional coordinate systems.
Claim 3
The combination of Shimodaira and Sugiyama teaches the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Shimodaira further teaches
the receiving unit receives a plurality of contact operation parameter sets,
(Shimodaira - [0377] Generally, a plurality of grip positions are often registered for a single workpiece. This is because, if a plurality of grip positions are registered, an optimal solution can be selected from among a plurality of grip solutions, and, thus, even in a case where an obtained grip solution candidate interferes, if there are other grip solution candidates, there is a high probability that it is determined that grip is possible.
each including the start portion, the start posture, the movement amount, and the posture change amount, and
EXAMINER NOTE: See rejection of claim 1 above regarding movement amounts and posture change amounts. It follows that a different grip position and posture (start position and posture) would obviously lead to different movement amounts and posture change amounts in order to reach the target destination. It should be noted that Shimodaira calculates a grip attitude (posture) for each candidate (see at least [0457])
(Shimodaira - [0457] Here, a description will be made of an interference determination method using an end effector model in step S6304 in FIG. 63 or in step S6405 in FIG. 64 described above. When a workpiece is gripped by an end effector, if the end effector interferes with a peripheral obstacle such as another workpiece or a storage container, gripping cannot be accurately performed. Therefore, a position or an attitude of the end effector of when an end effector model grips a workpiece model at a grip position candidate is calculated by the interference determination portion 8m in FIG. 31 in advance, and thus an interference determination with a peripheral member is performed)
the generation unit selects one contact operation parameter set from the plurality of contact operation parameter sets based on a position and orientation of the target workpiece in the container,
(Shimodaira - [0448] … For example, the evaluation index calculation portion 8q calculates a score as an evaluation index of each grip position candidate, and selects a grip position candidate having the highest score as a grip position. A position of a workpiece located at a high position, in other words, at a higher position in a bulk workpiece group may be selected as a grip position on the basis of height information of a workpiece. Preferably, the calculation unit 10 selects a grip position from among a plurality of grip solutions by taking into consideration both of a score and height information. In the above-described way, it is possible to perform more appropriate picking.)
EXAMINER NOTE: Grip candidates are evaluated, at least in part, based on the workpiece position.
(Shimodaira - [0529] … As a result, in a case where a workpiece model in which a grip position is registered for a workpiece in advance or a search model for a three-dimensional search has been registered, information regarding a face which is not searched for can be estimated on the basis of an attitude of the workpiece. Therefore, a face (also referred to as a non-searched fundamental direction image) which is not obtained as a result of the search and is obtained through estimation is also used as a grip position candidate, and thus a grip position of the face which is not actually searched for can be examined as a grip solution candidate, so that it is possible to obtain an advantage that an appropriate grip solution can be easily obtained.)
EXAMINER NOTE: Grip candidates are evaluated, at least in part, based on the workpiece attitude (posture).
and generates the robot program based on the selected one contact operation parameter set.
EXAMINER NOTE: The above passages support the functionality of Shimodaira's robot setting apparatus - namely, the grip setting functionality, which is a crucial step in program generation.
Claim 5
The combination of Shimodaira and Sugiyama teaches the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Shimodaira further teaches
wherein the contact operation is a shifting operation to contact and shift the workpiece stacked in bulk in the container, and
(Shimodaira - [0233] The robot main body 5 includes the movable arm portion ARM and the end effector EET fixed at the tip of the arm portion ARM. The robot main body 5 is driven by the robot controller 6, picks a single workpiece WK by operating the arm portion ARM, moves the workpiece WK to a desired position, and places and releases the workpiece WK at the position.)
EXAMINER NOTE: The robot moves (shifts) the workpiece to a desired position.
the receiving unit receives a shifting start position for shifting the workpiece as the start position.
(Shimodaira - [0294] … Grip attitude coordinate information 153 defining a grip attitude is displayed in the operation field 142. Here, position parameters X, Y, Z, R.sub.X, R.sub.Y and R.sub.Z displayed as the grip attitude coordinate information 153 indicate data of a position and an attitude of the end effector model EEM for the origin of the search model.)
Claim 8
Shimodaira teaches
a receiving unit
(Shimodaira - [0016] According to the robot setting apparatus related to a seventh aspect, in addition to any one of the configurations, the robot setting apparatus may further include a search model registration unit that registers any one of the fundamental direction images as a search model for performing a three-dimensional search for specifying a position and an attitude of each workpiece on a plurality of workpiece groups loaded in bulk. With this configuration, a search model used to perform a three-dimensional search is registered in common to a fundamental direction image for designating a grip position of a workpiece model, and thus a user can achieve labor-saving for setting work. )
configured to receive, on a workpiece coordinate system,
(Shimodaira - [0294] … The origin of the search model may be the centroid of the workpiece model CWM or a center coordinate of CAD data as described above.)
a start position and a start posture for starting the contact operation,
(Shimodaira - [0294] … Grip attitude coordinate information 153 defining a grip attitude is displayed in the operation field 142. Here, position parameters X, Y, Z, R.sub.X, R.sub.Y and R.sub.Z displayed as the grip attitude coordinate information 153 indicate data of a position and an attitude of the end effector model EEM for the origin of the search model.)
Regarding the limitations of
receive … a movement amount and a posture change amount of the contact operation; and
Shimodaira indicates that the picked workpieces are placed at a predetermined position and orientation, which indicates a change in position and posture.
(Shimodaira - [0234] As illustrated in FIG. 1, a plurality of workpieces WK are stored in the storage container BX such as a returnable box at random. … In other words, the robot controller 6 specifies a picking target workpiece WK with the sensor unit 2, and controls an operation of the robot such that the end effector EET grips the workpiece WK, and places the workpiece WK at a placement position at a predetermined reference attitude, and then the end effector EET is opened.)
Shimodaira further teaches
A generation unit configured to
generate a robot program for causing the robot to execute the contact operation for a target workpiece in the container, based on the received start position, start posture, movement amount, and posture change amount.
… and a control unit configured to control the robot in accordance with the generated robot program
(Shimodaira - [0010] According to a first aspect of the present invention, there is provided a robot setting apparatus controlling an operation of a robot performing a bin picking operation of sequentially taking out a plurality of workpieces stacked in a work space with an end effector provided at a tip of an arm portion of the robot, the robot setting apparatus including a workpiece model registration unit that registers a workpiece model indicating a three-dimensional shape of a workpiece; … a positioning unit that locates a position and an attitude of the workpiece model on a virtual three-dimensional space displayed on the display unit; and a grip position specifying unit that displays at least three height images in which a workpiece model positioned by the positioning unit is viewed from respective axis directions of three axes orthogonal to each other on the virtual three-dimensional space on the display unit as fundamental direction images, and specifies a grip position at which a workpiece model indicated by at least one of the displayed fundamental direction images is gripped by an end effector for the fundamental direction image. With this configuration, … a user can perform a grip position setting work on any fundamental direction image for which a grip position is easily set and can thus easily perform work, troublesome in the related art, of setting a grip position at which a workpiece is gripped by an end effector for a three-dimensional workpiece.
[0447] In the above-described way, the calculation unit 10 in FIG. 6 determines the presence or absence of a grip solution in which a workpiece can be gripped. In a case where a grip solution is obtained, an instruction is given to the robot controller 6 such that the workpiece is gripped by an end effector at a determined grip position. Thus, the robot controller 6 controls the end effector to pick the workpiece as instructed.)
Returning to the previous limitations of
receive … a movement amount and a posture change amount of the contact operation; and
Shimodaira may not explicitly teach a movement amount and a posture change amount. However, it is widely known in the art to express movement of a robot in terms of a difference in position and posture, as evidenced by Sugiyama.
(Sugiyama - [0060] Fig. 6 is a perspective view illustrating the target position Pt, a temporary target position Pt′, the target direction Dt, a temporary target direction Dt′, distance difference data ΔPt, posture difference data ΔDt, the current position Pc, and the current direction Dc. The movement control unit 313 may determine the target position Pt and the target direction Dt by the following operation. That is, the data storage unit 331 stores the distance difference data ΔPt and the posture difference data ΔDt. movement control unit 313 sets, for example, the target position Pt and the target direction Dt in a previous time step as the temporary target position Pt′ and the temporary target direction Dt′, and can calculate the target position Pt based on the temporary target position Pt′, the distance difference data ΔPt, and the posture difference data ΔDt and calculate the target direction Dt based on the temporary target direction Dt′ and the posture difference data ΔDt.)
Sugiyama further teaches
A generation unit configured to
generate a robot program for a target workpiece in the container, based on the received start position, start posture, movement amount, and posture change amount.
(Sugiyama - [0080] Next, the movement control unit 313 functions as the command value calculation unit 313c, and calculates a command value to operate the actuator 113 such that the positional deviation and the directional deviation are reduced (S1109))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Shimodaira's programming means with Sugiyama's teaching of expressing a destination in terms of a difference relative to a previous position and posture. The specification of a predetermined location and posture in absolute terms is functionally equivalent to expressing the same location and posture in terms of how different it is from another location and posture. In an analogous example, a pedestrian with a map could navigate to an intersection given the street names (coordinates) just as easily as they could find the same intersection knowing that it lies two blocks north and three blocks east of their current location (change amounts).
Claim 9
Shimodaira teaches
receiving, on a workpiece coordinate system,
(Shimodaira - [0294] … The origin of the search model may be the centroid of the workpiece model CWM or a center coordinate of CAD data as described above.)
a start position and a start posture for starting a contact operation for contacting a workpiece stacked in bulk in a container,
(Shimodaira - [0294] … Grip attitude coordinate information 153 defining a grip attitude is displayed in the operation field 142. Here, position parameters X, Y, Z, R.sub.X, R.sub.Y and R.sub.Z displayed as the grip attitude coordinate information 153 indicate data of a position and an attitude of the end effector model EEM for the origin of the search model.)
Regarding the limitations of
receive… a movement amount and a posture change amount of the contact operation;
Shimodaira indicates that the picked workpieces are placed at a predetermined position and orientation, which indicates a change in position and posture.
(Shimodaira - [0234] As illustrated in FIG. 1, a plurality of workpieces WK are stored in the storage container BX such as a returnable box at random. … In other words, the robot controller 6 specifies a picking target workpiece WK with the sensor unit 2, and controls an operation of the robot such that the end effector EET grips the workpiece WK, and places the workpiece WK at a placement position at a predetermined reference attitude, and then the end effector EET is opened.)
Shimodaira further teaches
generating a robot program for causing a robot to execute the contact operation for a target workpiece in the container, based on the received start position, start posture, movement amount, and posture change amount.
(Shimodaira - [0010] According to a first aspect of the present invention, there is provided a robot setting apparatus controlling an operation of a robot performing a bin picking operation of sequentially taking out a plurality of workpieces stacked in a work space with an end effector provided at a tip of an arm portion of the robot, the robot setting apparatus including a workpiece model registration unit that registers a workpiece model indicating a three-dimensional shape of a workpiece; a display unit that displays a workpiece model registered by the workpiece model registration unit; a positioning unit that locates a position and an attitude of the workpiece model on a virtual three-dimensional space displayed on the display unit; and a grip position specifying unit that displays at least three height images in which a workpiece model positioned by the positioning unit is viewed from respective axis directions of three axes orthogonal to each other on the virtual three-dimensional space on the display unit as fundamental direction images, and specifies a grip position at which a workpiece model indicated by at least one of the displayed fundamental direction images is gripped by an end effector for the fundamental direction image. With this configuration, each attitude of a workpiece model is displayed as three or more fundamental direction images having different viewpoints, and a user can perform a grip position setting work on any fundamental direction image for which a grip position is easily set and can thus easily perform work, troublesome in the related art, of setting a grip position at which a workpiece is gripped by an end effector for a three-dimensional workpiece.
[0447] In the above-described way, the calculation unit 10 in FIG. 6 determines the presence or absence of a grip solution in which a workpiece can be gripped. In a case where a grip solution is obtained, an instruction is given to the robot controller 6 such that the workpiece is gripped by an end effector at a determined grip position. Thus, the robot controller 6 controls the end effector to pick the workpiece as instructed.)
Returning to the previous limitations of
receive … a movement amount and a posture change amount of the contact operation; and
Shimodaira may not explicitly teach a movement amount and a posture change amount. However, it is widely known in the art to express movement of a robot in terms of a difference in position and posture, as evidenced by Sugiyama.
(Sugiyama - [0060] Fig. 6 is a perspective view illustrating the target position Pt, a temporary target position Pt′, the target direction Dt, a temporary target direction Dt′, distance difference data ΔPt, posture difference data ΔDt, the current position Pc, and the current direction Dc. The movement control unit 313 may determine the target position Pt and the target direction Dt by the following operation. That is, the data storage unit 331 stores the distance difference data ΔPt and the posture difference data ΔDt. movement control unit 313 sets, for example, the target position Pt and the target direction Dt in a previous time step as the temporary target position Pt′ and the temporary target direction Dt′, and can calculate the target position Pt based on the temporary target position Pt′, the distance difference data ΔPt, and the posture difference data ΔDt and calculate the target direction Dt based on the temporary target direction Dt′ and the posture difference data ΔDt.)
Sugiyama further teaches
A generation unit configured to
generate the robot program for a target workpiece in the container, based on the received start position, start posture, movement amount, and posture change amount.
(Sugiyama - [0080] Next, the movement control unit 313 functions as the command value calculation unit 313c, and calculates a command value to operate the actuator 113 such that the positional deviation and the directional deviation are reduced (S1109))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Shimodaira's programming means with Sugiyama's teaching of expressing a destination in terms of a difference relative to a previous position and posture. The specification of a predetermined location and posture in absolute terms is functionally equivalent to expressing the same location and posture in terms of how different it is from another location and posture. In an analogous example, a pedestrian with a map could navigate to an intersection given the street names (coordinates) just as easily as they could find the same intersection knowing that it lies two blocks north and three blocks east of their current location (change amounts).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimodaira (US 20180250822 A1) in view of Sugiyama (US-20200147804-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chatani (US 20210170588 A1)
Claim 4
The combination of Shimodaira and Sugiyama teaches the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Shimodaira further teaches
a third receiving unit configured to receive an approach limit distance of the robot with respect to an inner wall surface of the container,
(Shimodaira - [0621] … The detection condition setting field 781 includes … a margin setting field 784 for setting a margin from a wall surface of a storage container in order to expand an interference range of an end effector model. If the end effector model EEM enters a range of a distance (5 mm in FIG. 144) designated in the margin setting field 784, interference is determined.
[0623] … A point group interference error is displayed as a cause of grip impossibility in the grip solution candidate display field 811. Consequently, the user is provided with a guideline for necessary measures, for example, correction or addition of a grip position.)
EXAMINER NOTE: A threshold distance between the robot and the wall is set such that an error is identified if the threshold is violated
Shimodaira may not explicitly teach the aspect of modifying the trajectory of the robot when the threshold is violated. However, Chatani teaches a system in which a robot changes a placement position when the position is judged to be inadequate. Chatani teaches
wherein when it is determined that a post-movement position of the robot approaches within the approach limit distance from the inner wall surface, the generation unit modifies the movement amount so that the post-movement position of the robot becomes farther from the inner wall surface than the approach limit distance.
(Chatani - [0016] … The first calculation unit calculates first position and posture information indicating a position and posture of a target object from the first area information. The second calculation unit calculates second position and posture information that is different from the first position and posture information. The control unit grips the target object based on the first position and posture information, controls a first operation of moving the target object to a second area. When a result of the first operation is inadequate, control unit controls a second operation of arranging the target object at a position indicated by the second position and posture information in a posture indicated by the second position and posture information. The grip unit grips the target object and moves the gripped target object, based on the control by the control unit.)
EXAMINER NOTE: The object is moved in the container to a first position/posture. When this first position/posture is inadequate, the object is moved again to a second position/posture.
(Chatani - [0043] The second position and posture information indicates the position and posture of the article 200 when the grip unit 30 grips the article 200 again and arranges the article 200 such that a third operation of moving the article 200 to the second area is different from the first operation described above.
[0048] FIG. 5A is a diagram illustrating a first example of the calculation criterion of the second position and posture information according to an embodiment. In the example of FIG. 5A, a case in which an obstacle 260 is located next to the article 200 to be gripped is illustrated. Further, when the first area 201 is a container or the like, the side surface of the container also becomes an obstacle.)
EXAMINER NOTE: The container may be an obstacle, which should be noted for the citation to follow.
(Chatani - [0050] FIG. 5B is a diagram illustrating a second example of the calculation criterion of the second position and posture information according to an embodiment. For example, the position indicated by the second position and posture information calculated by the second calculation unit 22 indicates the position at which the distance d between the article 200 and the obstacle (the obstacle 260 and the side surface of the first area 201) is greater. Specifically, for example, as illustrated in FIG. 5B, the calculation criterion of the second position and posture information is a position at which the minimum distance between the article 200 to be gripped and the obstacle in the horizontal plane is maximum.)
EXAMINER NOTE: If the first position is inadequate, the second position is chosen such that the distance between the object and the walls of the container is maximized.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify Shimodaira with Chatani's suggestion to reposition parts when the current positioning is judged as inadequate, thus further avoiding interference between the robot and the wall when the component is picked again.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimodaira (US 20180250822 A1) in view of Sugiyama (US-20200147804-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Suzuki (US-20190351549-A1)
Claim 6
The combination of Shimodaira and Sugiyama teaches the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Shimodaira further teaches
wherein the contact operation is a pinching operation to pinch the workpiece stacked in bulk in the container … the receiving unit receives a pinching start position for pinching the workpiece as the start position.
(Shimodaira - [0234] … In other words, the robot controller 6 specifies a picking target workpiece WK with the sensor unit 2, and controls an operation of the robot such that the end effector EET grips the workpiece WK, and places the workpiece WK at a placement position at a predetermined reference attitude, and then the end effector EET is opened.)
EXAMINER NOTE: The end effector grips (pinches) the workpiece in the container.
(Shimodaira - [0294] … Grip attitude coordinate information 153 defining a grip attitude is displayed in the operation field 142. Here, position parameters X, Y, Z, R.sub.X, R.sub.Y and R.sub.Z displayed as the grip attitude coordinate information 153 indicate data of a position and an attitude of the end effector model EEM for the origin of the search model.)
EXAMINER NOTE: The grip position (pinching start position) is specified.
Shimodaira alone may not explicitly teach the following limitations in combination. However, Suzuki teaches
wherein the contact operation is a pinching operation to pinch the workpiece stacked in bulk in the container, move the workpiece in the container, and release the workpiece in the container, and
(Suzuki - [0063] FIG. 9 is a side view illustrating a third step of the first control of the present embodiment. The movement control unit 56 controls the robot 1 so as to lift the workpiece W1 as indicated by an arrow 93, and move the workpiece W1 to another position inside the container 9. By moving the workpiece W1, the position of the workpiece W1 inside the container 9 is changed. Sometimes, the workpiece W1 changes to a state in which it can be gripped by the grip regions 3r of the hand 2. Thus, the operation for taking out the workpiece W1 can be attempted at the new position and orientation of the workpiece W1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination of Shimodaira and Sugiyama with Suzuki's suggestion to rearrange workpieces in the container in order to allow for better gripping opportunities after workpieces are rearranged.
Claim 7
The combination of Shimodaira, Sugiyama, and Suzuki teaches the limitations of claim 6 as outlined above. Shimodaira notes the difficulty of obtaining optimal gripping solutions when parts are too close to the walls of a container. Shimodaira avoids interference with the wall by setting an inclination range of the arm
(Shimodaira - [0505] A threshold value of an inclined angle of an end effector may be changed through setting performed by a user. For example, in a case where a box having a deep bottom is used a storage container for workpieces, if an inclination of an end effector increases, not only the end effector but also the arm portion of the robot easily collides with a wall of the storage container, and thus an angle range is set to be narrow. Conversely, in a case where a box having a shallow bottom is used as a storage container, if an end effector does not interfere, the arm portion of the robot scarcely collides with a wall of the storage container, and thus an angle range is set to be wide. As mentioned above, if setting of an angle range is adjusted, it is possible to flexibly adjust grip propriety determination according to an actual situation.)
While Shimodaira's angle range adjustment avoids contact with walls, it results in fewer gripping candidates. As shown above with respect to claim 6, Suzuki proposes rearranging the workpieces in the bin such that they are easier to grip. One implementation of this method includes moving the workpieces closer to the center, thus providing a greater margin between the robot and the walls of the container. Suzuki thus teaches
further comprising another receiving unit configured to receive a movement to a center position of the container,
(Suzuki - [0100] FIG. 17 shows a schematic partial cross-sectional view of the container for illustrating a movement direction of the workpiece … In the example illustrated in FIG. 17, after gripping the workpiece W, the movement control unit 56 performs a step for moving the target workpiece W toward the center of the container 9 in a plan view of the container 9. The movement control unit 56 acquires the current position of the workpiece W and moves the workpiece W toward a center line 9c in the width direction of the container 9, as indicated by an arrow 90. … When the robot 1 is driven toward the target position and the target orientation, it is possible to avoid interference between the hand 2 and the wall part 9a. In other words, it is possible to suppress the hand 2 from coming into contact with the wall part 9a and being unable to grip the workpiece W.
[0101] The movement control unit 56 can move the workpiece W by an arbitrary movement amount. A predetermined movement amount can be used as the movement amount of the workpiece W. Alternatively, the movement control unit 56 may perform control of the robot 1 so as to transport the workpiece W to a predetermined position in the vicinity of the center of the container 9.
[0104] In this case, for example, a position of the center of gravity of the shape of the container in a plan view the container can be used as the center of the container.
wherein the generation unit modifies the received movement amount based on a result of the reception of the movement to the center position of the container.
EXAMINER NOTE: In light of the combination presented in the rejection of claim 1, it is apparent that moving the workpiece to the center of the container rather than the destination location would result in a different movement amount. In the case of Suzuki [0104], the movement amount corresponds to the center of gravity of the shape of the container.
As stated above with respect to claim 6, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination of Shimodaira and Sugiyama with Suzuki's suggestion to rearrange workpieces in the container in order to allow for better gripping opportunities after workpieces are rearranged. Specifically, moving the workpiece to the center further reduces the possibility of triggering an interference condition in Shimodaira’s robot when the arm approaches at an angle.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES MILLER WATTS whose telephone number is (703)756-1249. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:30 M-TH.
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, Adam Mott can be reached at 571-270-5376. 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.
/JAMES MILLER WATTS III/Examiner, Art Unit 3657
/JONATHAN L SAMPLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights