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 Claim
This action is in reply to the application filed on 5 of February 2025.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and are rejected as described below.
This application discloses and claims only subject matter disclosed in prior application no 17/267,476, filed 02/09/2021, and names the inventor or at least one joint inventor named in the prior application. Accordingly, this application may constitute a continuation or division. Should applicant desire to claim the benefit of the filing date of the prior application, attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. 120, 37 CFR 1.78, and MPEP § 211 et seq.
35 USC § 101—Eligible Subject Matter
With respect to the previous rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 101 the claims recite an abstract idea under 2A prong 1; however, the combination of elements renders this a practical application under 2A prong 2. Most notably, “the processor is further configured to convert the manipulation signal corresponding to the move key into the position command and convert the manipulation signal corresponding to the function key into the end effector operating command”.
35 USC § 103—Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are objected to as being currently rejected as below, but would be allowable if a terminal disclaimer is filed in order to overcome the Double Patenting rejection. The prior art of record most closely resembling the applicant’s claimed invention includes Saiki et. al. (US 20210248537), Nakamura (US 20250108508), 塩見 昌裕 (JP 5070441), and Lu et. al. (A friendly and human-based teleoperation system for humanoid robot using joystick).
Saiki teaches a remote operation device receives a changeover instruction to make a changeover between an actual work mode, a simulation mode, and a test mode, and executes the received mode. A server includes a work history database that stores an actual work record in the actual work mode, a simulation record in the simulation mode, and a test result in the test mode as a work history. The server calculates a skill level of an operator for a remote operation based on the work history stored in the work history database, and presents the calculated skill level.
Nakamura teaches systems and methods for controlling a cooperative robotic device including generating, for the cooperative robotic device, a plurality of candidate task end states associated with a first task. The method may further include selecting, for the cooperative robotic device, a first task end state from the plurality of candidate task end states, receiving load data regarding a load experienced by the cooperative robotic device, and selecting, based on the load data, a second task end state from the plurality of candidate task end states.
塩見 昌裕 teaches a robot remote control system, and more particularly to a robot remote control system for remotely controlling a robot.
Lu teaches a teleoperation system to control humanoid robot BHR-02 using joystick, which is convenient and simple for manipulation. This teleoperation system gives a friendly and human-based operation interface. And the system provides a switching command method for users to choose the part of the robot to operate using the joystick. Moreover, the on-line trajectory switching is realized in the system, with which the robot can switch trajectory between tasks seamlessly.
None of the above prior art explicitly teaches a technique that can automatically update calendar items in an electronic calendar system "position command for instructing a position of a wrist part of each of the robots, and an end effector operating command for controlling operation of an end effector attached to the wrist part of each of the robots, and the processor is further configured to convert the manipulation signal corresponding to the move key into the position command and convert the manipulation signal corresponding to the function key into the end effector operating command" as recited in claims 1 and 18-20, and these are the reasons which adequately reflect the Examiner's opinion as to why Claims 1-20 are allowable over the prior art of record.
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 double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 5, 8-12, 14, 16-23, and 25 of U.S. Patent No. 17/267,476. Although the independent claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other for the following reasons: They both are aimed at providing autonomous vehicle access to user calendars in order to schedule a pick-up time before a start of the virtual meeting and scheduling a drop-off after an end of the virtual meeting without the need for user interaction with calendar prompts.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATHEUS R STIVALETTI whose telephone number is 571-272-5758. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30-5:30.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rutao Wu can be reached on 571-272-6045. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-1822.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone or 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/MATHEUS RIBEIRO STIVALETTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3623 7/9/2026
Prosecution Insights