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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 06/11/2025 and 04/01/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 2, “wherein, when the robotic lawn mower is approaching the boundary, the control unit (is adapted to” should be “wherein, when the robotic lawn mower is approaching the boundary, the control unit is adapted to”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “the robotic lawn mower having a longitudinal mower extension extending between the end portions,” However, the nature of the longitudinal mower extension is not clearly defined by the claim or the written description. The longitudinal mower extension is not claimed in a manner which clearly defines the structure of the longitudinal mower extension (i.e., the claim merely sets forth that the robotic lawn mower has a longitudinal mower extension extending between the end portions, but does not specify what the longitudinal mower extension is). The written description fails to clarify the nature of the longitudinal mower extension. Paragraphs [0009]-[0010], [0041], [0053], and [0102] make reference to the longitudinal mower extension, and particularly define a longitudinal mower extension C. However, these paragraphs likewise fail to state what the longitudinal mower extension C actually is (i.e., does this limitation refer to a physical component of the lawn mower?). FIGs. 6-10 depict the longitudinal mower extension C in a variety of configurations, though these illustrations appear to depict the longitudinal mower extension C as an axis of the robotic lawn mower (i.e., the longitudinal mower extension C does not appear to be a physical component of the robotic lawn mower). Therefore, for the purposes of this examination, the longitudinal mower extension is being interpreted as an axis of the robot lawn mower. FIG. 8, included below, provides an illustration of this interpretation of the longitudinal mower extension as an axis.
PNG
media_image1.png
404
476
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 2-11 are dependent upon claim 1 and therefore inherit the above-described deficiencies. Accordingly, claims 2-11 are rejected under similar reasoning as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 7, the claim recites “the control unit is adapted to position the robotic lawn mower by means of input derived from a navigation sensor arrangement and/or at least one environment detection device comprised in the robotic lawn mower.” However, the use of the term “and/or” renders the claim indefinite, as it is unclear whether the claim intends to require that the control unit is adapted to both position the robotic lawn mower by means of input derived from a navigation sensor arrangement and at least one environment detection device comprised in the robotic lawn mower, or if only one of these options is required. For the purposes of this examination, the term “and/or” is being interpreted under broadest reasonable interpretation as “or”.
Claims 8-10 are dependent upon claim 7 and therefore inherit the above-described deficiencies. Accordingly, claims 8-10 are rejected under similar reasoning as claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 11, the claim recites “wherein the robotic lawn mower comprises at least one environment detection device adapted to detect objects, wherein said environment detection device comprises at least one of - a radar transceiver,- a camera device,- an ultrasonic device, - a Lidar device, and/or - a boundary wire sensor.” However, the use of the term “and/or” renders the claim indefinite. While the use of the phrasing “comprises at least one of” makes it clear that the robotic lawn mower must comprise at least one of the provided options, the term “and/or” makes it ambiguous whether the Lidar device option and the boundary wire sensor option are intended to be separate options or a singular combined option requiring both the Lidar device and the boundary wire sensor. For the purposes of this examination, “and/or” ” is being interpreted under broadest reasonable interpretation as “or”. Therefore, “a Lidar device” and “a boundary wire sensor” are being interpreted as separate options.
Regarding claim 12, the claim recites “the robotic lawn mower having a longitudinal mower extension extending between the end portions,” However, the nature of the longitudinal mower extension is not clearly defined by the claim or the written description. The longitudinal mower extension is not claimed in a manner which clearly defines the structure of the longitudinal mower extension (i.e., the claim merely sets forth that the robotic lawn mower has a longitudinal mower extension extending between the end portions, but does not specify what the longitudinal mower extension is). The written description fails to clarify the nature of the longitudinal mower extension. Paragraphs [0009]-[0010], [0041], [0053], and [0102] make reference to the longitudinal mower extension, and particularly define a longitudinal mower extension C. However, these paragraphs likewise fail to state what the longitudinal mower extension C actually is (i.e., does this limitation refer to a physical component of the lawn mower?). FIGs. 6-10 depict the longitudinal mower extension C in a variety of configurations, though these illustrations appear to depict the longitudinal mower extension C as an axis of the robotic lawn mower (i.e., the longitudinal mower extension C does not appear to be a physical component of the robotic lawn mower). Therefore, for the purposes of this examination, the longitudinal mower extension is being interpreted as an axis of the robot lawn mower. FIG. 8, included above, provides an illustration of this interpretation of the longitudinal mower extension as an axis.
Claims 13-18 are dependent upon claim 12 and therefore inherit the above-described deficiencies. Accordingly, claims 13-18 are rejected under similar reasoning as claim 12 above.
Regarding claim 17, the claim recites “the robotic lawn mower is positioned by using input derived from a navigation sensor arrangement and/or at least one environment detection device comprised in the robotic lawn mower.” However, the use of the term “and/or” renders the claim indefinite, as it is unclear whether the claim intends to require that the robotic lawn mower is positioned by using input derived from a navigation sensor arrangement and at least one environment detection device comprised in the robotic lawn mower, or if only one of these options is required. For the purposes of this examination, the term “and/or” is being interpreted under broadest reasonable interpretation as “or”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 6-8, 11-12, 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allard et al. (WO 2022/250589 A1), hereinafter Allard, in view of Hunt et al. (US 7,024,843 B2), hereinafter Hunt.
Regarding claim 1, Allard teaches a robotic lawn mower, comprising:
a control unit adapted to control the operation of the robotic lawn mower,
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The object of the present disclosure is to provide means and a method for cutting grass close to objects and borders, and to cut relatively long grass. This object is achieved by means of robotic lawn mower having a first end portion and a second end portion. The robotic lawn mower comprises a body, at least two drive wheels, at least one swivelable wheel, a control unit adapted to control the operation of the robotic lawn mower, a rotatable grass cutting disc having a rotation axis, and at least two electric motor arrangements.
and at least a first rotatable grass cutting disc having a rotation axis,
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The robotic lawn mower comprises a body, at least two drive wheels, at least one swivelable wheel, a control unit adapted to control the operation of the robotic lawn mower, a rotatable grass cutting disc having a rotation axis, and at least two electric motor arrangements.
wherein a first end portion is facing a forward travelling direction and a second end portion is facing a reverse travelling direction,
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The object of the present disclosure is to provide means and a method for cutting grass close to objects and borders, and to cut relatively long grass. This object is achieved by means of robotic lawn mower having a first end portion and a second end portion." Allard further teaches (Pg. 5 lines 10-14): "According to some aspects, the robotic lawn mower is adapted for a forward travelling direction and a reverse travelling direction, where the first end portion is facing the forward travelling direction and the second end portion is facing the reverse travelling direction."
the robotic lawn mower having a longitudinal mower extension extending between the end portions,
FIG. 6, included below, demonstrates that the robotic lawn mower has a longitudinal mower extension extending between the end portions, as depicted by the axis D extending between the end portions of the mower.
PNG
media_image2.png
614
376
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein, when the robotic lawn mower, during grass cutting in the forward direction… is approaching a boundary of the operation area, wherein the boundary has a main boundary extension, the control unit is adapted to
Allard teaches (Pg. 11 lines 20-30): "According to some aspects, with reference to Figure 6, the control unit 110 is adapted to control the robotic lawn mower 100a to move towards a boundary 182, 220 in a forward traveling direction F of the robotic lawn mower 100 such that the first end portion 101 approaches the boundary 182, 220, and to determine if a distance to the boundary 182, 220 fulfills a condition..." Allard further teaches (Pg. 12 lines 1-12): "According to some aspects, the boundary is in the form of a boundary wire 220 defining an operation area for the robotic lawn mower 100, where the control unit 110 is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower 100b when the robotic lawn mower 100 is positioned on the boundary wire 220. The robotic lawn mower 100b is then positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139, the boundary wire 220 being positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139. This distance is adapted such that the gras is cut until the lawn edge 139 when the robotic lawn mower 100c, 100d performs the acuate movement..."
However, Allard does not outright teach a cutting lane having a main lane extension in an operation area, controlling the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a first arcuate movement in a first arcuate direction along a first cutting arc having a first angular span such that the mower extension is positioned mainly parallel to the boundary extension, controlling the robotic lawn mower to move a cutting lane change distance mainly parallel to the boundary extension in the forward travelling direction until an adjacent further cutting lane, having a further main lane extension, is sufficiently reached for enabling cutting, controlling the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a second arcuate movement in a second arcuate direction, opposite the first arcuate direction, along a second cutting arc having a second angular span such that the longitudinal extension is positioned mainly parallel to the further main lane extension, and controlling the robotic lawn mower to move in the forward travelling direction along the further main lane extension in the further cutting lane. Hunt teaches a self-propelled mower having enhanced maneuverability, comprising:
wherein, when the robotic lawn mower, during grass cutting in the forward direction in a cutting lane having a main lane extension in an operation area, is approaching a boundary of the operation area…
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." FIG. 13, included below, illustrates the grass cutting operation of Hunt. Hunt is modified such that the first axis 408 corresponds to the boundary wire 220 of Allard, which corresponds to the point at which both lawn mowers are made to rotate.
PNG
media_image3.png
278
392
media_image3.png
Greyscale
control the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a first arcuate movement in a first arcuate direction along a first cutting arc having a first angular span such that the mower extension is positioned mainly parallel to the boundary extension,
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." FIG. 13, included above, illustrates that the lawn mower is made to travel in a direction perpendicular to the first row 400. Hunt is modified such that the mower 10 corresponds to the robotic lawnmower 100 of Hunt; in this arrangement, this traveling direction is mainly parallel to the boundary extension of Allard.
control the robotic lawn mower to move a cutting lane change distance mainly parallel to the boundary extension in the forward travelling direction until an adjacent further cutting lane, having a further main lane extension, is sufficiently reached for enabling cutting,
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410."
control the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a second arcuate movement in a second arcuate direction, opposite the first arcuate direction, along a second cutting arc having a second angular span such that the longitudinal extension is positioned mainly parallel to the further main lane extension,
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." FIG. 13, included above, illustrates that the lawn mower is made to rotate at the termination point of the traverse section 404, re-orienting the lawnmower such that the forward traveling direction corresponds to the direction indicated by arrowhead 406 of row 402. Hunt is modified such that the mower 10 corresponds to the robotic lawnmower 100 of Hunt; in this arrangement, this traveling direction is mainly parallel to the further main lane extension (i.e., the spacing of row 402).
control the robotic lawn mower to move in the forward travelling direction along the further main lane extension in the further cutting lane.
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." FIG. 13, included above, illustrates that the lawn mower is made to move in the forward traveling direction along the further main lane extension (i.e., the spacing of row 402) in the further cutting lane (i.e., row 402).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allard to incorporate the teachings of Hunt to provide a cutting lane having a main lane extension in an operation area, controlling the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a first arcuate movement in a first arcuate direction along a first cutting arc having a first angular span such that the mower extension is positioned mainly parallel to the boundary extension, controlling the robotic lawn mower to move a cutting lane change distance mainly parallel to the boundary extension in the forward travelling direction until an adjacent further cutting lane, having a further main lane extension, is sufficiently reached for enabling cutting, controlling the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a second arcuate movement in a second arcuate direction, opposite the first arcuate direction, along a second cutting arc having a second angular span such that the longitudinal extension is positioned mainly parallel to the further main lane extension, and controlling the robotic lawn mower to move in the forward travelling direction along the further main lane extension in the further cutting lane. Allard and Hunt are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of robotic lawn mowing systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Hunt, as the cutting lane control of Hunt advantageously serves to improve mower efficiency by reducing energy consumption of the mower by allowing for cutting overlap of appropriate spacing relative to the swath or cut width of the lane, as recognized by Hunt (see at least Col. 12 lines 32-58 and Col. 13 lines 28-37).
Regarding claim 6, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 1. However, Allard does not outright teach that the second angular span lies in the interval 80°-100°. Hunt further teaches:
the second angular span lies in the interval 80°-100°.
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." Here, an angular span of approximately ninety degrees lies in the interval 80°-100°.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allard and Hunt to further incorporate the teachings of Hunt to provide that the second angular span lies in the interval 80°-100°. Allard and Hunt are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of robotic lawn mowing systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Hunt, as the cutting lane and turning control of Hunt advantageously serves to improve mower efficiency by reducing energy consumption of the mower by allowing for cutting overlap of appropriate spacing relative to the swath or cut width of the lane, as recognized by Hunt (see at least Col. 12 lines 32-58 and Col. 13 lines 28-37). Further, the turning control of Hunt beneficially allows for rotations of a desired angular amount (see at least Col. 12 lines 25-29).
Regarding claim 7, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 1. Allard further teaches:
the control unit is adapted to position the robotic lawn mower by means of input derived from a navigation sensor arrangement and/or at least one environment detection device comprised in the robotic lawn mower.
Allard teaches (Pg. 9 lines 22-30): "According to some aspects, the robotic lawn mower 100 may further comprise at least one navigation sensor arrangement 175… In one embodiment, the navigation sensor arrangement 175 comprises one or more sensors for deduced navigation... The navigation sensor arrangement 175 may comprise a satellite navigation sensor such as a GPS (Global Positioning System) device or other Global Navigation Satellite Sytem (GNSS) device..."
Regarding claim 8, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 7. Allard further teaches:
the navigation sensor arrangement comprises at least one of satellite signal navigation sensors; and deduced reckoning sensors.
Allard teaches (Pg. 9 lines 22-30): "According to some aspects, the robotic lawn mower 100 may further comprise at least one navigation sensor arrangement 175… In one embodiment, the navigation sensor arrangement 175 comprises one or more sensors for deduced navigation. Examples of sensors for deduced reckoning are odometers, accelerometers, gyroscopes, and compasses... The navigation sensor arrangement 175 may comprise a satellite navigation sensor such as a GPS (Global Positioning System) device or other Global Navigation Satellite Sytem (GNSS) device..."
Regarding claim 11, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 1. Allard further teaches:
the robotic lawn mower comprises at least one environment detection device adapted to detect objects,
Allard teaches (Pg. 9 line 22 - Pg. 10 line 8): "According to some aspects, the robotic lawn mower 100 may further comprise at least one navigation sensor arrangement 175 and/or at least one wire sensor 173… The wire sensor 173 is adapted to sense a boundary wire control signal and/or at least one environment detection device 170, 171 adapted to detect objects..."
wherein said environment detection device comprises at least one of - a radar transceiver,- a camera device,- an ultrasonic device,- a Lidar device, and/or - a boundary wire sensor.
Allard teaches (Pg. 9 line 22 - Pg. 10 line 8): "According to some aspects, the robotic lawn mower 100 may further comprise at least one navigation sensor arrangement 175 and/or at least one wire sensor 173… The wire sensor 173 is adapted to sense a boundary wire control signal and/or at least one environment detection device 170, 171 adapted to detect objects. In this example, radar transceivers 170,171 are provided and adapted to transmit signals and to receive reflected signals that have been reflected by an object. Other environment detection devices such as camera devices, ultrasonic devices, and Lidar devices are of curse [sic] also conceivable, as alternatives or in any suitable combination."
Regarding claim 12, Allard teaches a method for controlling a robotic lawn mower, comprising:
a control unit adapted to control the operation of the robotic lawn mower,
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The object of the present disclosure is to provide means and a method for cutting grass close to objects and borders, and to cut relatively long grass. This object is achieved by means of robotic lawn mower having a first end portion and a second end portion. The robotic lawn mower comprises a body, at least two drive wheels, at least one swivelable wheel, a control unit adapted to control the operation of the robotic lawn mower, a rotatable grass cutting disc having a rotation axis, and at least two electric motor arrangements.
wherein a first end portion of the robotic lawn mower is facing a forward travelling direction and a second end portion of the robotic lawn mower is facing a reverse travelling direction,
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The object of the present disclosure is to provide means and a method for cutting grass close to objects and borders, and to cut relatively long grass. This object is achieved by means of robotic lawn mower having a first end portion and a second end portion." Allard teaches (Pg. 5 lines 10-14): "According to some aspects, the robotic lawn mower is adapted for a forward travelling direction and a reverse travelling direction, where the first end portion is facing the forward travelling direction and the second end portion is facing the reverse travelling direction."
the robotic lawn mower having a longitudinal mower extension extending between the end portions,
FIG. 6, included above, demonstrates that the robotic lawn mower has a longitudinal mower extension extending between the end portions, as depicted by the axis D extending between the end portions of the mower.
wherein, when the robotic lawn mower, during grass cutting in the forward direction… is approaching a boundary of the operation area, wherein the boundary has a main boundary extension, the method comprises
Allard teaches (Pg. 11 lines 20-30): "According to some aspects, with reference to Figure 6, the control unit 110 is adapted to control the robotic lawn mower 100a to move towards a boundary 182, 220 in a forward traveling direction F of the robotic lawn mower 100 such that the first end portion 101 approaches the boundary 182, 220, and to determine if a distance to the boundary 182, 220 fulfills a condition..." Allard further teaches (Pg. 12 lines 1-12): "According to some aspects, the boundary is in the form of a boundary wire 220 defining an operation area for the robotic lawn mower 100, where the control unit 110 is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower 100b when the robotic lawn mower 100 is positioned on the boundary wire 220. The robotic lawn mower 100b is then positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139, the boundary wire 220 being positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139. This distance is adapted such that the gras is cut until the lawn edge 139 when the robotic lawn mower 100c, 100d performs the acuate movement..."
However, Allard does not outright teach a cutting lane having a main lane extension in an operation area, controlling the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a first arcuate movement in a first arcuate direction along a first cutting arc having a first angular span such that the mower extension is positioned mainly parallel to the boundary extension, controlling the robotic lawn mower to move a cutting lane change distance mainly parallel to the boundary extension in the forward travelling direction until an adjacent further cutting lane, having a further main lane extension, is sufficiently reached for enabling cutting, controlling the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a second arcuate movement in a second arcuate direction, opposite the first arcuate direction, along a second cutting arc having a second angular span such that the longitudinal extension is positioned mainly parallel to the further main lane extension, and controlling the robotic lawn mower to move in the forward travelling direction along the further main lane extension in the further cutting lane. Hunt teaches a self-propelled mower having enhanced maneuverability, comprising:
wherein, when the robotic lawn mower, during grass cutting in the forward direction in a cutting lane having a main lane extension in an operation area, is approaching a boundary of the operation area…
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." FIG. 13, included above, illustrates the grass cutting operation of Hunt. Hunt is modified such that the first axis 408 corresponds to the boundary wire 220 of Allard, which corresponds to the point at which both lawn mowers are made to rotate.
controlling the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a first arcuate movement in a first arcuate direction along a first cutting arc having a first angular span such that the mower extension is positioned mainly parallel to the boundary extension;
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." FIG. 13, included above, illustrates that the lawn mower is made to travel in a direction perpendicular to the first row 400. Hunt is modified such that the mower 10 corresponds to the robotic lawnmower 100 of Hunt; in this arrangement, this traveling direction is mainly parallel to the boundary extension of Allard.
controlling the robotic lawn mower to move a cutting lane change distance mainly parallel to the boundary extension in the forward travelling direction until an adjacent further cutting lane, having a further main lane extension, is sufficiently reached for enabling cutting;
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410."
controlling the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a second arcuate movement in a second arcuate direction, opposite the first arcuate direction, along a second cutting arc having a second angular span such that the longitudinal extension is positioned mainly parallel to the further main lane extension;
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." FIG. 13, included above, illustrates that the lawn mower is made to rotate at the termination point of the traverse section 404, re-orienting the lawnmower such that the forward traveling direction corresponds to the direction indicated by arrowhead 406 of row 402. Hunt is modified such that the mower 10 corresponds to the robotic lawnmower 100 of Hunt; in this arrangement, this traveling direction is mainly parallel to the further main lane extension (i.e., the spacing of row 402).
and controlling the robotic lawn mower to move in the forward travelling direction along the further main lane extension in the further cutting lane.
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." FIG. 13, included above, illustrates that the lawn mower is made to move in the forward traveling direction along the further main lane extension (i.e., the spacing of row 402) in the further cutting lane (i.e., row 402).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allard to incorporate the teachings of Hunt to provide a cutting lane having a main lane extension in an operation area, controlling the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a first arcuate movement in a first arcuate direction along a first cutting arc having a first angular span such that the mower extension is positioned mainly parallel to the boundary extension, controlling the robotic lawn mower to move a cutting lane change distance mainly parallel to the boundary extension in the forward travelling direction until an adjacent further cutting lane, having a further main lane extension, is sufficiently reached for enabling cutting, controlling the robotic lawn mower such that the second end portion performs a second arcuate movement in a second arcuate direction, opposite the first arcuate direction, along a second cutting arc having a second angular span such that the longitudinal extension is positioned mainly parallel to the further main lane extension, and controlling the robotic lawn mower to move in the forward travelling direction along the further main lane extension in the further cutting lane. Allard and Hunt are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of robotic lawn mowing systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Hunt, as the cutting lane control of Hunt advantageously serves to improve mower efficiency by reducing energy consumption of the mower by allowing for cutting overlap of appropriate spacing relative to the swath or cut width of the lane, as recognized by Hunt (see at least Col. 12 lines 32-58 and Col. 13 lines 28-37).
Regarding claim 14, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 12. However, Allard does not outright teach that the second angular span lies in the interval 80°-100°. Hunt further teaches:
the second angular span lies in the interval 80°-100°.
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." Here, an angular span of approximately ninety degrees lies in the interval 80°-100°.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allard and Hunt to further incorporate the teachings of Hunt to provide that the second angular span lies in the interval 80°-100°. Allard and Hunt are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of robotic lawn mowing systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Hunt, as the cutting lane and turning control of Hunt advantageously serves to improve mower efficiency by reducing energy consumption of the mower by allowing for cutting overlap of appropriate spacing relative to the swath or cut width of the lane, as recognized by Hunt (see at least Col. 12 lines 32-58 and Col. 13 lines 28-37). Further, the turning control of Hunt beneficially allows for rotations of a desired angular amount (see at least Col. 12 lines 25-29).
Regarding claim 15, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 12. Allard further teaches:
the robotic lawn mower comprises at least two drive wheels arranged along a drive wheel axis with a center, the center being positioned between the drive wheels,
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The robotic lawn mower comprises a body, at least two drive wheels… At least two drive wheels have a drive wheel axis with a center and are drivably connected to a first electric motor arrangement..." FIG. 2, included below, demonstrates that the center of the drive wheel axis 145 is positioned between the drive wheels 130a and 130b.
PNG
media_image4.png
638
436
media_image4.png
Greyscale
where, when the robotic lawn mower is approaching the boundary, the method comprises positioning the robotic lawn mower such that there is a predetermined shortest distance between the center and the boundary.
Allard teaches (Pg. 11 line 20 - Pg. 12 line 12): "According to some aspects, with reference to Figure 6, the control unit 110 is adapted to control the robotic lawn mower 100a to move towards a boundary 182, 220 in a forward traveling direction F of the robotic lawn mower 100 such that the first end portion 101 approaches the boundary 182, 220, and to determine if a distance to the boundary 182, 220 fulfills a condition. When the condition is fulfilled, the control unit 110 is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower 100b, and to control the drive wheels 130a, 130b to turn in mutually different directions... According to some aspects, the boundary is in the form of a boundary wire 220 defining an operation area for the robotic lawn mower 100, where the control unit 110 is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower 100b when the robotic lawn mower 100 is positioned on the boundary wire 220. The robotic lawn mower 100b is then positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139, the boundary wire 220 being positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139. This distance is adapted such that the grass is cut until the lawn edge 139 when the robotic lawn mower 100c, 100d performs the arcuate movement, the cutting arc 210 having a closest arc portion 211 that is closest to the lawn edge 139. In this example, the condition relates to a determined distance between the boundary wire 220 and the robotic lawn mower 100 falling below a first threshold." FIG. 6, included above, demonstrates that the robotic lawn mower is positioned such that there is a predetermined shortest distance between the center and the boundary.
Regarding claim 16, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 15. Allard further teaches:
the boundary is positioned between a border and the operation area,
FIG. 6, included above, demonstrates that the boundary (i.e., boundary 220) is positioned between a border (i.e., lawn edge 139) and the operation area of the lawn mower.
and wherein the shortest distance admits the first cutting arc to have a closest arc portion that is closest to the border without passing the border.
Allard teaches (Pg. 11 line 20 - Pg. 12 line 12): "According to some aspects, with reference to Figure 6, the control unit 110 is adapted to control the robotic lawn mower 100a to move towards a boundary 182, 220 in a forward traveling direction F of the robotic lawn mower 100 such that the first end portion 101 approaches the boundary 182, 220, and to determine if a distance to the boundary 182, 220 fulfills a condition. When the condition is fulfilled, the control unit 110 is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower 100b, and to control the drive wheels 130a, 130b to turn in mutually different directions... According to some aspects, the boundary is in the form of a boundary wire 220 defining an operation area for the robotic lawn mower 100, where the control unit 110 is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower 100b when the robotic lawn mower 100 is positioned on the boundary wire 220. The robotic lawn mower 100b is then positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139, the boundary wire 220 being positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139. This distance is adapted such that the grass is cut until the lawn edge 139 when the robotic lawn mower 100c, 100d performs the arcuate movement, the cutting arc 210 having a closest arc portion 211 that is closest to the lawn edge 139. In this example, the condition relates to a determined distance between the boundary wire 220 and the robotic lawn mower 100 falling below a first threshold." FIG. 6, included above, demonstrates that the shortest distance admits the first cutting arc to have a closest arc portion that is closest to the border without passing the border.
Regarding claim 17, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 12. Allard further teaches:
the robotic lawn mower is positioned by using input derived from a navigation sensor arrangement and/or at least one environment detection device comprised in the robotic lawn mower.
Allard teaches (Pg. 9 lines 22-30): "According to some aspects, the robotic lawn mower 100 may further comprise at least one navigation sensor arrangement 175… In one embodiment, the navigation sensor arrangement 175 comprises one or more sensors for deduced navigation... The navigation sensor arrangement 175 may comprise a satellite navigation sensor such as a GPS (Global Positioning System) device or other Global Navigation Satellite Sytem (GNSS) device..."
Regarding claim 18, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 12. Allard further teaches:
A control unit arrangement adapted to execute the method according to claim 12.
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The object of the present disclosure is to provide means and a method for cutting grass close to objects and borders, and to cut relatively long grass. This object is achieved by means of robotic lawn mower having a first end portion and a second end portion. The robotic lawn mower comprises a body, at least two drive wheels, at least one swivelable wheel, a control unit adapted to control the operation of the robotic lawn mower, a rotatable grass cutting disc having a rotation axis, and at least two electric motor arrangements." Allard further teaches (Pg. 17 line 31 - Pg. 18 line 16): "In Figure 7 it is schematically illustrated, in terms of a number of functional units, the components of the control unit 110 according to embodiments of the discussions herein. Processing circuitry 115 is provided using any combination of one or more of a suitable central processing CPU, multiprocessor, microcontroller, digital signal processor DSP, etc., capable of executing software instructions stored in a computer program product, e.g. in the form of a storage medium 120... Particularly, the processing circuitry 115 is configured to cause the control unit 110 to perform a set of operations, or steps to control the operation of the robotic lawn mower 100... For example, the storage medium 120 may store the set of operations, and the processing circuitry 115 may be configured to retrieve the set of operations from the storage medium 120 to cause the control unit 110 to perform the set of operations. The set of operations may be provided as a set of executable instructions." The Examiner further refers to the above rejection of claim 12 over Allard and Hunt.
Regarding claim 19, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 12. Allard further teaches:
A computer program product comprising computer executable instructions stored on media to execute the method according to claim 12.
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The object of the present disclosure is to provide means and a method for cutting grass close to objects and borders, and to cut relatively long grass. This object is achieved by means of robotic lawn mower having a first end portion and a second end portion. The robotic lawn mower comprises a body, at least two drive wheels, at least one swivelable wheel, a control unit adapted to control the operation of the robotic lawn mower, a rotatable grass cutting disc having a rotation axis, and at least two electric motor arrangements." Allard further teaches (Pg. 17 line 31 - Pg. 18 line 16): "In Figure 7 it is schematically illustrated, in terms of a number of functional units, the components of the control unit 110 according to embodiments of the discussions herein. Processing circuitry 115 is provided using any combination of one or more of a suitable central processing CPU, multiprocessor, microcontroller, digital signal processor DSP, etc., capable of executing software instructions stored in a computer program product, e.g. in the form of a storage medium 120... Particularly, the processing circuitry 115 is configured to cause the control unit 110 to perform a set of operations, or steps to control the operation of the robotic lawn mower 100... For example, the storage medium 120 may store the set of operations, and the processing circuitry 115 may be configured to retrieve the set of operations from the storage medium 120 to cause the control unit 110 to perform the set of operations. The set of operations may be provided as a set of executable instructions." The Examiner further refers to the above rejection of claim 12 over Allard and Hunt.
Claim(s) 2-5 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allard in Hunt in view of Kraft (US 2019/0357430 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 1. Allard further teaches:
the robotic lawn mower comprises a body,
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The robotic lawn mower comprises a body..."
at least two drive wheels arranged along a drive wheel axis with a center, the center being positioned between the drive wheels,
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The robotic lawn mower comprises a body, at least two drive wheels… At least two drive wheels have a drive wheel axis with a center and are drivably connected to a first electric motor arrangement..." FIG. 2, included above, demonstrates that the center of the drive wheel axis 145 is positioned between the drive wheels 130a and 130b.
the robotic lawn mower further comprising at least one swivelable wheel,
Allard teaches (Pg. 2 lines 12-26): "The robotic lawn mower comprises… at least one swivelable wheel..."
wherein, when the robotic lawn mower is approaching the boundary, the control unit (is adapted to
Allard teaches (Pg. 11 lines 20-30): "According to some aspects, with reference to Figure 6, the control unit 110 is adapted to control the robotic lawn mower 100a to move towards a boundary 182, 220 in a forward traveling direction F of the robotic lawn mower 100 such that the first end portion 101 approaches the boundary 182, 220, and to determine if a distance to the boundary 182, 220 fulfills a condition..."
control the drive wheels to turn in mutually different directions such that the second end portion of the robotic lawn mower performs the first arcuate movement in the first arcuate direction along the first cutting arc having the first angular span, enabling the first cutting disc to cut grass within the first cutting arc,
Allard teaches (Col. 3 lines 9-24): "According to some aspects, the control unit is adapted to control the robotic lawn mower to move towards a boundary such that the first end portion approaches the boundary and to determine if a distance to the boundary fulfills a condition. When that is the case, the control unit is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower, and to control the drive wheels to turn in mutually different directions such that the second end portion of the robotic lawn mower performs an arcuate movement along a cutting arc, enabling the cutting disc to cut grass within the cutting arc."
However, Allard does not outright teach controlling the drive wheels to move the robotic lawn mower the cutting lane change distance mainly parallel to the boundary extension of the boundary in the forward travelling direction until the adjacent further cutting lane is sufficiently reached for enabling cutting, controlling the drive wheels to turn in mutually different directions such that the second end portion of the robotic lawn mower performs the second arcuate movement in the second arcuate direction along the second cutting arc having the second angular span, and controlling the drive wheels to move the robotic lawn mower in the forward travelling direction along the further main lane extension in the further cutting lane. Hunt further teaches:
control the drive wheels to move the robotic lawn mower the cutting lane change distance mainly parallel to the boundary extension of the boundary in the forward travelling direction until the adjacent further cutting lane is sufficiently reached for enabling cutting,
Hunt teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410."
control the drive wheels to turn in mutually different directions such that the second end portion of the robotic lawn mower performs the second arcuate movement in the second arcuate direction... along the second cutting arc having the second angular span
Hunt teaches (Col. 7 lines 42-58): "The controller 70 may energize a drive motor 5... to apply rotation in opposite directions to different wheels on the vehicle to turn or spin the mower." (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." Referring to FIG. 13, included above, the Examiner has interpreted the first arcuate direction as the arcuate direction between row 400 and traverse section 404. The second arcuate direction corresponds to the arcuate direction between traverse section 404 and row 402.
control the drive wheels to move the robotic lawn mower in the forward travelling direction along the further main lane extension in the further cutting lane.
Hunt teaches (Col. 3 line 62- Col. 4 line 7): "The controller 70 controls the wheels or wheel assemblies 16... to move the mower 10 in a desired direction or in accordance with a desired pattern, pattern segment, path segment, path, or maneuver." Hunt further teaches (Col. 12 lines 32-58): "FIG. 13 illustrates the mower 10 traversing over at least a fraction of a work area. The mower 10 travels in a direction indicated by the arrow heads 406. The work area includes a first row 400 traveled in a first direction that is spaced apart from a second row 402 traveled in a second direction, that is generally opposite the first direction. The rows (400, 402) may be spaced apart by an amount less than one mower width or one cutting swath of the mower 10 to allow for cutting overlap between adjacent rows... The mower 10 may track the first row 400, followed by execution of a first zero radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at the end of the first row 400 at a first axis 408. The first axis 408 is located at the intersection of the first row 400 and the transverse section 404. The mower moves in a generally linear direction along the traverse section 404 of length 411 until it reaches a termination point of the traverse section 404 and makes a second zero degree radius turn of approximately ninety degrees at a second axis 410." FIG. 13, included above, illustrates that the lawn mower is made to move in the forward traveling direction along the further main lane extension (i.e., the spacing of row 402) in the further cutting lane (i.e., row 402).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allard and Hunt to further incorporate the teachings of Hunt to provide controlling the drive wheels to move the robotic lawn mower the cutting lane change distance mainly parallel to the boundary extension of the boundary in the forward travelling direction until the adjacent further cutting lane is sufficiently reached for enabling cutting, controlling the drive wheels to turn in mutually different directions such that the second end portion of the robotic lawn mower performs the second arcuate movement in the second arcuate direction along the second cutting arc having the second angular span, and controlling the drive wheels to move the robotic lawn mower in the forward travelling direction along the further main lane extension in the further cutting lane. Allard and Hunt are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of robotic lawn mowing systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Hunt, as the cutting lane control of Hunt advantageously serves to improve mower efficiency by reducing energy consumption of the mower by allowing for cutting overlap of appropriate spacing relative to the swath or cut width of the lane, as recognized by Hunt (see at least Col. 12 lines 32-58 and Col. 13 lines 28-37).
However, neither Allard nor Hunt outright teach that the second arcuate direction is opposite the first arcuate direction. Kraft teaches autonomous grounds maintenance machines with path planning, comprising:
...the second arcuate direction, opposite the first arcuate direction…
Kraft teaches ([0059]): "In the illustrated embodiment, the mower 100 travels from starting point 304 to destination waypoint 306. After reaching destination waypoint 306, the mower 100 may determine a second destination waypoint 308, rotate X1 degrees, and travel toward the second destination waypoint. This sequence of rotating and travelling may continue to reach third destination waypoint 310, fourth destination waypoint 312, and final destination waypoint 314 (e.g., using rotations X2, X3, and X4, respectively). The mower 100 may rotate in the opposite directions and arrive at the same orientation (e.g., 360 degrees minus X1 degrees in the opposite direction is the same orientation as rotating X1 degrees)... In some embodiments, the mower 100 may select the smallest angle available to rotate and orient itself toward the next destination waypoint (e.g., 90 degrees counter-clockwise instead of 270 degrees clockwise). In other embodiments, the mower 100 may rotate using the larger, or largest, angle."
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allard and Hunt to incorporate the teachings of Kraft to provide that the second arcuate direction is opposite the first arcuate direction. Allard, Hunt, and Kraft are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of robotic lawn mowing systems. Further, Hunt and Kraft are each directly concerned with controlling turning of the lawn mower. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Kraft, as doing so advantageously improves maneuverability of the robotic lawn mower by allowing for rotation in opposite directions to arrive at the same orientation (e.g., rotating using a larger 270 degree clockwise turn instead of a 90 degree counter-clockwise turn), as recognized by Kraft (see at least [0059]). This is particularly advantageous in conjunction with the teachings of Hunt, as Hunt is already concerned with making 90 degree turns (see at least Col. 12 lines 32-58 of Hunt).
Regarding claim 3, Allard, Hunt, and Kraft teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 2. Allard further teaches:
when the robotic lawn mower is approaching the boundary, the control unit is adapted to position the robotic lawn mower such that there is a predetermined shortest distance between the center and the boundary.
Allard teaches (Pg. 11 line 20 - Pg. 12 line 12): "According to some aspects, with reference to Figure 6, the control unit 110 is adapted to control the robotic lawn mower 100a to move towards a boundary 182, 220 in a forward traveling direction F of the robotic lawn mower 100 such that the first end portion 101 approaches the boundary 182, 220, and to determine if a distance to the boundary 182, 220 fulfills a condition. When the condition is fulfilled, the control unit 110 is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower 100b, and to control the drive wheels 130a, 130b to turn in mutually different directions... According to some aspects, the boundary is in the form of a boundary wire 220 defining an operation area for the robotic lawn mower 100, where the control unit 110 is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower 100b when the robotic lawn mower 100 is positioned on the boundary wire 220. The robotic lawn mower 100b is then positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139, the boundary wire 220 being positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139. This distance is adapted such that the grass is cut until the lawn edge 139 when the robotic lawn mower 100c, 100d performs the arcuate movement, the cutting arc 210 having a closest arc portion 211 that is closest to the lawn edge 139. In this example, the condition relates to a determined distance between the boundary wire 220 and the robotic lawn mower 100 falling below a first threshold." FIG. 6, included above, demonstrates that the robotic lawn mower is positioned such that there is a predetermined shortest distance between the center and the boundary.
Regarding claim 4, Allard, Hunt, and Kraft teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 3. Allard further teaches:
the boundary is positioned between a border and the operation area,
FIG. 6, included above, demonstrates that the boundary (i.e., boundary 220) is positioned between a border (i.e., lawn edge 139) and the operation area of the lawn mower.
and wherein the shortest distance admits the first cutting arc to have a closest arc portion that is closest to the border without passing the border.
Allard teaches (Pg. 11 line 20 - Pg. 12 line 12): "According to some aspects, with reference to Figure 6, the control unit 110 is adapted to control the robotic lawn mower 100a to move towards a boundary 182, 220 in a forward traveling direction F of the robotic lawn mower 100 such that the first end portion 101 approaches the boundary 182, 220, and to determine if a distance to the boundary 182, 220 fulfills a condition. When the condition is fulfilled, the control unit 110 is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower 100b, and to control the drive wheels 130a, 130b to turn in mutually different directions... According to some aspects, the boundary is in the form of a boundary wire 220 defining an operation area for the robotic lawn mower 100, where the control unit 110 is adapted to stop the robotic lawn mower 100b when the robotic lawn mower 100 is positioned on the boundary wire 220. The robotic lawn mower 100b is then positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139, the boundary wire 220 being positioned a certain distance away from a lawn edge 139. This distance is adapted such that the grass is cut until the lawn edge 139 when the robotic lawn mower 100c, 100d performs the arcuate movement, the cutting arc 210 having a closest arc portion 211 that is closest to the lawn edge 139. In this example, the condition relates to a determined distance between the boundary wire 220 and the robotic lawn mower 100 falling below a first threshold." FIG. 6, included above, demonstrates that the shortest distance admits the first cutting arc to have a closest arc portion that is closest to the border without passing the border.
Regarding claim 5, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 1. However, neither Allard nor Hunt outright teach that the first angular span lies in the interval 260°-280°. Kraft teaches autonomous grounds maintenance machines with path planning, comprising:
the first angular span lies in the interval 260°-280°.
Kraft teaches ([0059]): "In the illustrated embodiment, the mower 100 travels from starting point 304 to destination waypoint 306. After reaching destination waypoint 306, the mower 100 may determine a second destination waypoint 308, rotate X1 degrees, and travel toward the second destination waypoint. This sequence of rotating and travelling may continue to reach third destination waypoint 310, fourth destination waypoint 312, and final destination waypoint 314 (e.g., using rotations X2, X3, and X4, respectively). The mower 100 may rotate in the opposite directions and arrive at the same orientation (e.g., 360 degrees minus X1 degrees in the opposite direction is the same orientation as rotating X1 degrees)... In some embodiments, the mower 100 may select the smallest angle available to rotate and orient itself toward the next destination waypoint (e.g., 90 degrees counter-clockwise instead of 270 degrees clockwise). In other embodiments, the mower 100 may rotate using the larger, or largest, angle."
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allard and Hunt to incorporate the teachings of Kraft to provide that the first angular span lies in the interval 260°-280°. Allard, Hunt, and Kraft are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of robotic lawn mowing systems. Further, Hunt and Kraft are each directly concerned with controlling turning of the lawn mower. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Kraft, as doing so advantageously improves maneuverability of the robotic lawn mower by allowing for rotation in opposite directions to arrive at the same orientation (e.g., rotating using a larger 270 degree clockwise turn instead of a 90 degree counter-clockwise turn), as recognized by Kraft (see at least [0059]). This is particularly advantageous in conjunction with the teachings of Hunt, as Hunt is already concerned with making 90 degree turns (see at least Col. 12 lines 32-58 of Hunt).
Regarding claim 13, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 12. However, neither Allard nor Hunt outright teach that the first angular span lies in the interval 260°-280°. Kraft teaches autonomous grounds maintenance machines with path planning, comprising:
the first angular span lies in the interval 260°-280°.
Kraft teaches ([0059]): "In the illustrated embodiment, the mower 100 travels from starting point 304 to destination waypoint 306. After reaching destination waypoint 306, the mower 100 may determine a second destination waypoint 308, rotate X1 degrees, and travel toward the second destination waypoint. This sequence of rotating and travelling may continue to reach third destination waypoint 310, fourth destination waypoint 312, and final destination waypoint 314 (e.g., using rotations X2, X3, and X4, respectively). The mower 100 may rotate in the opposite directions and arrive at the same orientation (e.g., 360 degrees minus X1 degrees in the opposite direction is the same orientation as rotating X1 degrees)... In some embodiments, the mower 100 may select the smallest angle available to rotate and orient itself toward the next destination waypoint (e.g., 90 degrees counter-clockwise instead of 270 degrees clockwise). In other embodiments, the mower 100 may rotate using the larger, or largest, angle."
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allard and Hunt to incorporate the teachings of Kraft to provide that the first angular span lies in the interval 260°-280°. Allard, Hunt, and Kraft are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of robotic lawn mowing systems. Further, Hunt and Kraft are each directly concerned with controlling turning of the lawn mower. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Kraft, as doing so advantageously improves maneuverability of the robotic lawn mower by allowing for rotation in opposite directions to arrive at the same orientation (e.g., rotating using a larger 270 degree clockwise turn instead of a 90 degree counter-clockwise turn), as recognized by Kraft (see at least [0059]). This is particularly advantageous in conjunction with the teachings of Hunt, as Hunt is already concerned with making 90 degree turns (see at least Col. 12 lines 32-58 of Hunt).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allard and Hunt in view of Mårtensson et al. (US 2022/0322602 A1), hereinafter Mårtensson.
Regarding claim 9, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 8. Allard further teaches:
the navigation sensor arrangement comprises deduced reckoning sensors…
Allard teaches (Pg. 9 lines 22-30): "According to some aspects, the robotic lawn mower 100 may further comprise at least one navigation sensor arrangement 175… In one embodiment, the navigation sensor arrangement 175 comprises one or more sensors for deduced navigation. Examples of sensors for deduced reckoning are odometers, accelerometers, gyroscopes, and compasses..."
However, Allard does not outright teach that the navigation sensor arrangement comprises deduced reckoning sensors that include visual sensors for Simultaneous Localization And Mapping, SLAM, navigation. Mårtensson teaches a robotic lawnmower, comprising:
the navigation sensor arrangement comprises deduced reckoning sensors that include visual sensors for Simultaneous Localization And Mapping, SLAM, navigation.
Mårtensson teaches ([0062]): "The robotic lawnmower 200 may also or alternatively comprise deduced reckoning sensors 280. The deduced reckoning sensors may be odometers, accelerometer or other deduced reckoning sensors… The deduced reckoning sensors may alternatively or additionally operate in coordination with the optical navigation sensor 285, so that SLAM/VSLAM navigation is improved."
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allard and Hunt to incorporate the teachings of Mårtensson to provide that the navigation sensor arrangement comprises deduced reckoning sensors that include visual sensors for Simultaneous Localization And Mapping, SLAM, navigation. Allard, Hunt, and Mårtensson are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of robotic lawn mowing systems. Further, Allard and Mårtensson are each directly concerned with the use of deduced reckoning sensors. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Mårtensson, as doing so beneficially serves to enhance SLAM/VSLAM navigation of the robotic lawn mower, as recognized by Mårtensson (see at least [0062]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allard and Hunt in view of Yamauchi et al. (US 2016/0100522 A1), hereinafter Yamauchi.
Regarding claim 10, Allard and Hunt teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 7. However, Allard does not outright teach that the navigation sensor arrangement is adapted for navigation by means of active local radio beacons using Ultra Wide Band, UWB. Yamauchi teaches an autonomous mowing robot, comprising:
the navigation sensor arrangement is adapted for navigation by means of active local radio beacons using Ultra Wide Band, UWB.
Yamauchi teaches ([0041]): " In general, ultra-wideband (also known as UWB, ultra-wide band and ultraband) is a radio technology which operates at a low energy level for short-range, high-bandwidth communications… Use of ultra-wideband can be beneficial in autonomous lawn mowing because the signals can be transmitted past/through obstacles such as bushes or trees and provide precision localization of the lawn mowing robot 10 relative to the UWB beacons 810a-c. UWB transceivers 811a-c emit an omnidirectional signal so the use of UWB signals can be more resistant to robot orientation than line-of-sight optical systems, such as vision-based or laser-based systems. Additionally, a UWB signal can pass through small obstacles such as trees and shrubs allowing placement of the UWB beacons in less visible locations about a mowable space (e.g., as shown by the transmission between beacon 810b and 810c)."
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allard and Hunt to incorporate the teachings of Yamauchi to provide that the navigation sensor arrangement is adapted for navigation by means of active local radio beacons using Ultra Wide Band, UWB. Allard, Hunt, and Yamauchi are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of robotic lawn mowing systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Yamauchi, as utilizing the UWB localization and navigation features of Yamauchi beneficially improves autonomous lawn mowing because UWB signals can be transmitted past/through obstacles such as bushes or trees and provide precision localization of the robotic lawn mower relative to the active local radio beacons, as recognized by Yamauchi (see at least [0041]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yazaki et al. (US 2013/0282224 A1) teaches a robotic lawn-mowing work machine, wherein the work machine is capable of a switch back operation utilizing an arc of 90 degrees (see in particular [0079] and FIG. 6B, which illustrates a trajectory pattern of the lawn mower). Evans (US 4,949,534 A) teaches a swiveling lawn mower, wherein pivoting means enable the elective pivoting of a boom frame in a horizontal plane for moving cutting means to selected cutting positions, including enabling cutting an approximately 280 degree area encompassed by full swiveling action, as recognized by Evans (see at least Col. 2 line 66 – Col. 3 line 32).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK T GLENN III whose telephone number is (571)272-5078. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM - 4:30PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jelani Smith can be reached at 571-270-3969. 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.
/F.T.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/DALE W HILGENDORF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
