DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Examiner's Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs / columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicants’ definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mahon (US 20190163992 A1) in view of Boyle (US 12045059 B1) (the combination of which will be referred to as 'combination Mahon' hereinafter). As regards the individual claims:
Regarding claim 1, Mahon teaches an apparatus for:
inspecting a marking (Mahon: ¶ 007; determine a retroreflectivity of said at least a portion of the road marking as a function of said first intensity and said estimated ambient intensity.) . . . and to transport the apparatus along the travel path during the inspection of the marking; (Mahon: ¶ 007; a structure arranged to be mounted to a front of a vehicle, the system comprising: at least one light source mounted on said structure and arranged to substantially continuously project light across at least a portion of a traffic lane at a specified distance from the vehicle during a measurement run, the light being limited to a particular portion of the visible light spectrum; a camera apparatus mounted on said structure [and inter alia] determine a retroreflectivity of said at least a portion of the road marking as a function of said first intensity and said estimated ambient intensity.) a light source that emits light toward the marking at a known angle of incidence; (Mahon: ¶ 071; controller 340 in turn controls the light source 20 as required; and also the PIC controller 340 can be used to control the angle of the projected light beam by varying the projected image or light guide) . . . and (ii) a portion of the light emitted by the light source toward the marking on the airfield; (Mahon: ¶ 071; controller 340 in turn controls the light source 20 as required; and also the PIC controller 340 can be used to control the angle of the projected light beam by varying the projected image or light guide) . . . and (ii) identify a degraded portion of the marking that has experienced degradation to an extent requiring repair to promote compliance with an applicable standard governing visibility of the marking. (Mahon: ¶ 113; determine retroreflectivity measurements or quality for a specific location, for a selected length of road or even a selected area of a map.) (Mahon: ¶ 062; can be employed to meet the American Standard ASTM E 1710.) (Mahon: ¶ 111; for each road marking inspected and measured along a section of road, the system can store R.sub.l, GPS coordinates, inspected image intensity values etc. for later review, analysis and/or reporting.)
To the extent Mahon is silent about or does not explicitly teach: on an airfield, the airfield comprising a runway where the aircraft takes off and lands, an apron where the aircraft parks between landing and taking off, and a taxiway that can be used by the aircraft to travel between the runway and the apron, the apparatus comprising: a receiver that receives a command identifying a location of the marking to be inspected; a navigation system that: (i) generates a route to be traveled by the apparatus to reach the region of the airfield identified in the command received by the receiver, and (ii) defines a travel path to be traveled by the apparatus during inspection of the marking; a mobility system that is operable to transport the apparatus along the route to the region of the airfield, . . . sensor circuitry that detects: (i) an obstacle on the airfield encountered by the apparatus during inspection of the marking, and a computing system comprising one or a plurality of computer processors that executes computer-executable instructions to: (i) control operation of the mobility system to avoid a collision between the apparatus and the obstacle on the airfield detected by the sensor circuitry, Boyle does teach:
on an airfield, the airfield comprising a runway where the aircraft takes off and lands, an apron where the aircraft parks between landing and taking off, and a taxiway that can be used by the aircraft to travel between the runway and the apron, the apparatus comprising: (Boyle: ¶ 006; Col. 2, Lns. 35-38; routing algorithm capable of automatically generating the optimal routes from one point to another on the airfield using the hard surfaces, avoiding the obstacles, and staying within the defined boundaries) a receiver that receives a command identifying a location of the marking to be inspected; a navigation system that: (i) generates a route to be traveled by the apparatus to reach the region of the airfield identified in the command received by the receiver, and (Boyle: ¶ 010; Col. 4, Lns. 8-13; radio system 44 capable of reliable data transport, and an on-board computer system 43 capable of taking requests for navigation from a server based control system 35 and then locally managing the autonomous navigation to fulfill the request.) (ii) defines a travel path to be traveled by the apparatus during inspection of the marking; (Boyle: ¶ 006; Col. 2, Lns. 43-45; server is configured to send the calculated routing to the mobile robot at an assigned time. Each mobile robot is configured to execute the request to follow the route) a mobility system that is operable to transport the apparatus along the route to the region of the airfield, (Boyle: ¶ 022; Col. 5, Lns. 60-65; mobile robot . . . has a unique wheel frame. It provides unprecedented mobility. It has a multi-purpose platform. It has autonomous driving and precise navigation) . . . sensor circuitry that detects: (i) an obstacle on the airfield encountered by the apparatus during inspection of the marking, (Boyle: ¶ 006; Col. 2, Lns. 49-57; a system for detecting foreign object debris (FOD) using a detection machine. The system comprises a detection machine, a computer vision application, an inspection application) . . . and a computing system comprising one or a plurality of computer processors that executes computer-executable instructions (Boyle: ¶ 035; Col. 7, Lns. 23-26; programmable or computer-readable instructions may include various commands that instruct the processing machine to perform specific tasks, such as steps that constitute the method of the disclosure.) to: (i) control operation of the mobility system to avoid a collision between the apparatus and the obstacle on the airfield detected by the sensor circuitry, (Boyle: ¶ 006; Col. 2, Lns. 35-38; algorithm capable of automatically generating the optimal routes from one point to another on the airfield using the hard surfaces, avoiding the obstacles, and staying within the defined boundaries.)
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Boyle with the teachings of Mahon because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of improving the efficiency of runway maintenance operations (Boyle: ¶ 012, Col. 4, Lns. 34-39).
Regarding claim 2, as detailed above, combination Mahon teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Boyle further teaches:
further comprising a transmitter that transmits (Boyle: ¶ 007; Col. 3, Lns. 11; data connection is configured to transmit the anomalies exceeding a predetermined threshold of duplicate detections in the same geographic location on overlapping images to a cloud service. The cloud service is configured to send a notification comprising the anomalies exceeding the predetermined threshold to an inspection application. The inspection application is configured to generate an alert.)
And Mahon teaches: a location of the degraded portion of the marking requiring repair to a remote terminal for coordination of ground personnel to complete a repair operation.. (Mahon: ¶ 108; When the measurement run is completed, at step 108, for each road marking inspected and measured along a section of road, the system can store R.sub.l, GPS coordinates, inspected image intensity values etc. for later review, analysis and/or reporting).
Regarding claim 3, as detailed above, combination Mahon teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Mahon further teaches:
wherein the sensor circuitry measures an intensity of the portion of the light reflected by the marking, (Mahon: ¶ 111; for each road marking inspected and measured along a section of road, the system can store R.sub.l, GPS coordinates, inspected image intensity values etc. for later review, analysis and/or reporting.) and the computing system identifies the degraded portion of the marking in response to determining that the intensity of the portion of the light reflected by the marking has fallen below a threshold. (Mahon: ¶ 100; a grey level threshold is generated for the image region . . . it will be appreciated that for a broken line road marking such as those shown in FIG. 8 (or a poorly maintained road marking) more than one bright region per polygon may be detected.) (Mahon: ¶ 109; [equation for calculating intensity])
Regarding claim 4, as detailed above, combination Mahon teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Mahon further teaches:
wherein the threshold is above a minimum permissible intensity under an applicable law or regulation governing visibility of the marking on the airfield (Mahon: ¶ 062; can be employed to meet the American Standard ASTM E 1710.)
Regarding claim 5, Mahon teaches an apparatus for:
inspecting a marking (Mahon: ¶ 007; determine a retroreflectivity of said at least a portion of the road marking as a function of said first intensity and said estimated ambient intensity.) . . . and to transport the apparatus along the travel path during the inspection of the marking; (Mahon: ¶ 007; a structure arranged to be mounted to a front of a vehicle, the system comprising: at least one light source mounted on said structure and arranged to substantially continuously project light across at least a portion of a traffic lane at a specified distance from the vehicle during a measurement run, the light being limited to a particular portion of the visible light spectrum; a camera apparatus mounted on said structure [and inter alia] determine a retroreflectivity of said at least a portion of the road marking as a function of said first intensity and said estimated ambient intensity.) a light source that emits light toward the marking at a known angle of incidence; (Mahon: ¶ 071; controller 340 in turn controls the light source 20 as required; and also the PIC controller 340 can be used to control the angle of the projected light beam by varying the projected image or light guide) . . . and (ii) a portion of the light emitted by the light source toward the marking on the airfield; and (Mahon: ¶ 071; controller 340 in turn controls the light source 20 as required; and also the PIC controller 340 can be used to control the angle of the projected light beam by varying the projected image or light guide) . . . and (ii) identify a quality of the marking. (Mahon: ¶ 113; determine retroreflectivity measurements or quality for a specific location, for a selected length of road or even a selected area of a map.)
(Mahon: ¶ 062; can be employed to meet the American Standard ASTM E 1710.)
To the extent Mahon is silent about or does not explicitly teach: . . . on an airfield, the airfield comprising a runway where the aircraft takes off and lands, an apron where the aircraft parks between landing and taking off, and a taxiway that can be used by the aircraft to travel between the runway and the apron, the apparatus comprising: a receiver that receives a command identifying a location of the marking to be inspected; a navigation system that: (i) generates a route to be traveled by the apparatus to reach the region of the airfield identified in the command received by the receiver, and (ii) defines a travel path to be traveled by the apparatus during inspection of the marking; a mobility system that is operable to transport the apparatus along the route to the region of the airfield, . . . sensor circuitry that detects: (i) an obstacle on the airfield encountered by the apparatus during inspection of the marking, . . . a computing system comprising one or a plurality of computer processors that executes computer-executable instructions to: (i) control operation of the mobility system to avoid a collision between the apparatus and the obstacle on the airfield detected by the sensor circuitry, . . . ; Boyle does teach:
on an airfield, the airfield comprising a runway where the aircraft takes off and lands, an apron where the aircraft parks between landing and taking off, and a taxiway that can be used by the aircraft to travel between the runway and the apron, the apparatus comprising: (Boyle: ¶ 006; Col. 2, Lns. 35-38; routing algorithm capable of automatically generating the optimal routes from one point to another on the airfield using the hard surfaces, avoiding the obstacles, and staying within the defined boundaries) a receiver that receives a command identifying a location of the marking to be inspected; a navigation system that: (i) generates a route to be traveled by the apparatus to reach the region of the airfield identified in the command received by the receiver, and (Boyle: ¶ 010; Col. 4, Lns. 8-13; radio system 44 capable of reliable data transport, and an on-board computer system 43 capable of taking requests for navigation from a server based control system 35 and then locally managing the autonomous navigation to fulfill the request.) (ii) defines a travel path to be traveled by the apparatus during inspection of the marking; (Boyle: ¶ 006; Col. 2, Lns. 43-45; server is configured to send the calculated routing to the mobile robot at an assigned time. Each mobile robot is configured to execute the request to follow the route) a mobility system that is operable to transport the apparatus along the route to the region of the airfield, (Boyle: ¶ 022; Col. 5, Lns. 60-65; mobile robot . . . has a unique wheel frame. It provides unprecedented mobility. It has a multi-purpose platform. It has autonomous driving and precise navigation) . . . sensor circuitry that detects: (i) an obstacle on the airfield encountered by the apparatus during inspection of the marking, (Boyle: ¶ 006; Col. 2, Lns. 49-57; a system for detecting foreign object debris (FOD) using a detection machine. The system comprises a detection machine, a computer vision application, an inspection application) . . . a computing system comprising one or a plurality of computer processors that executes computer-executable instructions (Boyle: ¶ 035; Col. 7, Lns. 23-26; programmable or computer-readable instructions may include various commands that instruct the processing machine to perform specific tasks, such as steps that constitute the method of the disclosure.) to: (i) control operation of the mobility system to avoid a collision between the apparatus and the obstacle on the airfield detected by the sensor circuitry, (Boyle: ¶ 006; Col. 2, Lns. 35-38; algorithm capable of automatically generating the optimal routes from one point to another on the airfield using the hard surfaces, avoiding the obstacles, and staying within the defined boundaries.)
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Boyle with the teachings of Mahon because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of improving the efficiency of runway maintenance operations (Boyle: ¶ 012, Col. 4, Lns. 34-39).
Regarding claim 6, as detailed above, combination Mahon teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 5. Mahon further teaches:
wherein the one or a plurality of computer processors further executes computer-executable instructions to: perform a comparison of the identified quality of the marking to a standard. (Mahon: ¶ 113; determine retroreflectivity measurements or quality for a specific location, for a selected length of road or even a selected area of a map.) (Mahon: ¶ 062; can be employed to meet the American Standard ASTM E 1710.)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure Trautmann (DE 102011077592 A1) which discloses an autonomous lane marking validation system. Also made of record is Sorensen (US 20130194565 A1) which teaches a method of testing reflectivity of markings.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES PALL whose telephone number is (571)272-5280. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30 - 18:30.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached on 571-272-1206. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C.P./ Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights