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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-20 have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 07/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant filled Terminal Disclaimer on 07/02/2026 but Terminal Disclaimer review decision is Disapproved due to Improper signature: The signature should be between forward slash marks.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the "right to exclude" granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321 (c) or 1.321 (d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321 (b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 of the instant application are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of US Patent No. (12210342B2). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because following observation is made:
Instant Application (19038704)
US Patent No. (12210342)
1. A control method, comprising: determining, at a device to be controlled, a communications latency between the device to be controlled and an operator workstation; determining an environmental condition, said environmental condition being: i) whether a person is present in the environment in which said device is operating or ii) whether a drop off is present in the environment in which said device is operating; determining a first device operating parameter based on the determined communications latency, a device operation to be performed, and whether a person is present in the environment in which said device is operating or whether a drop off is present in the environment in which said device is operating; receiving a control signal from the operator workstation; and implementing a device operation, at the device to be controlled, based on the received control signal and the determined first device operating parameter.
1. A control method, comprising: determining, at a device to be controlled, a communications latency between the device to be controlled and an operator workstation, said device being a forklift; determining a device operation to be performed, said device operation to be performed being one of: i) positioning forks of the forklift in a pallet, ii) traveling between locations without a pallet, iii) traveling between locations with a pallet, iv) lifting a pallet or vi) lowering a pallet; determining one or more device operating parameters based at least the determined communications latency, where determining one or more device operating parameters based at least the determined communications latency includes determining a first device operating parameter based on both the determined communications latency and the device operation to be performed; communicating positional uncertainty corresponding to the determined communications latency by adding a visual indicator of positional uncertainty to an image of a portion of an operational environment communicated to the operator workstation, said adding a visual indicator including blurring or shading a portion of said image of the portion of the operational environment, said portion which is blurred or shaded corresponding to the location of the positional uncertainty in the operational environment; receiving a control signal, used to control motion, from the operator workstation; and implementing a device operation involving motion based on the received control signal and a device operating parameter determined based on the determined communications latency.
5. The method of claim 3, further comprising: determining: i) whether people are present in the environment in which said device is operating or ii) a drop off is present in the environment in which said device is operating; and wherein determining one or more device operating parameters based at least the determined communications latency includes determining the first device operating parameter based on the determined communications latency, the device operation to be performed and whether people or a drop off are present in the environment in which said device is operating.
12. A robotic device, comprising: a communications interface including a transmitter and a receiver; and a processor configured to control the robotic device to: determine a communications latency between the robotic device and an operator workstation; determine an environmental condition, said environmental condition being: i) whether a person is present in the environment in which said robotic device is operating or ii) whether a drop off is present in the environment in which said robotic device is operating; determine a first device operating parameter based on the determined communications latency, a device operation to be performed, and whether a person is present in the environment in which said robotic device is operating or whether a drop off is present in the environment in which said robotic device is operating; receive a control signal from the operator workstation; and implement a device operation based on the received control signal and the first device operating parameter.
10. A robotic device, said robotic device being a forklift, comprising: a communications interface including a transmitter and a receiver; and a processor configured to control the robotic device to: determine a device operation to be performed, said device operation to be performed being one of: i) positioning forks of the forklift in a pallet, ii) traveling between locations without a pallet, iii) traveling between locations with a pallet, iv) lifting a pallet or vi) lowering a pallet; determine one or more device operating parameters based at least a determined communications latency, where determining one or more device operating parameters based at least the determined communications latency includes determining a first device operating parameter based on both the determined communications latency and the device operation to be performed; communicate positional uncertainty corresponding to the determined communications latency by adding a visual indicator of positional uncertainty to an image of a portion of an operational environment communicated to an operator workstation, said adding a visual indicator including blurring or shading a portion of said image of the portion of the operational environment, said portion which is blurred or shaded corresponding to the location of the positional uncertainty in the operational environment; receive a control signal, used to control motion, from the operator workstation; and implement a device operation involving motion based on the received control signal and a device operating parameter determined based on the determined communications latency.
5. The method of claim 3, further comprising: determining: i) whether people are present in the environment in which said device is operating or ii) a drop off is present in the environment in which said device is operating; and wherein determining one or more device operating parameters based at least the determined communications latency includes determining the first device operating parameter based on the determined communications latency, the device operation to be performed and whether people or a drop off are present in the environment in which said device is operating.
As demonstrated, the independent claims of US Patent No. (12210342) disclose the features of the independent claims of 19038704 while the claims are broader in scope and anticipate the claimed invention in the parent. From this comparison it shows that the present application discloses the similar/same/identical limitations with terminology, both method/system/apparatus claim discloses with broader or same but not narrow means as specially in present claim does not further define the method/system/apparatus while similar/same/identical limitations patented in claim. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art having the claims of 19038704 to modify the claims to achieve the features of claims of US 12210342.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the non-statutory double patenting rejection and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) in this office action.
The reason for indicating allowable subject matter is based on the combination limitations of the independent claims. These limitations are interpreted by the examiner, with the assumption of rewritten or amended to corrected the non-statutory double patenting rejection and 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
The reason for indicating allowable subject matter over the prior art of record Watts (US20170182664A1).
Watts discloses determining whether first operation commanded by a remote control system is within first tier of operations. A robot is prevented from performing the first operation. A determination is made whether second operation commanded by the remote control system is within second tier of operations that provides corresponding network strength threshold that is less than or equal to measured network strength. The robot is caused to perform the second operation based on determining whether the second operation is within the second tier of operations.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARDUL D PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-7758. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm (IFP).
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, KITO ROBINSON can be reached at (571)270-3921. 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.
/SHARDUL D PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights