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 Claims
Claims 1-7 are presented for examination.
Claims 1-7 are rejected.
Claims 4 is objected to.
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 2-7 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 2-7 are rejected based on the lack of antecedent basis as follows:
[Claim 2] (Original) The mobile robot according to claim 1, wherein the second controller adjusts the load such that, when a target pressure position related to a shift in center of gravity of the main body portion in the movement control is not inside an actual support region in which the main body portion is actually supported by the predetermined support portions, the target pressure position is displaced inside the actual support region.
[Claim 4] (Currently Amended) The mobile robot according to claim 1, wherein in a case where number of predetermined support portions in contact with the predetermined contact surface among the plurality of support portions is three or more, actual support region is a polygonal region formed by connecting contact points between each of the predetermined support portions and the predetermined contact surface; and in a case where number of predetermined support portions in contact with the predetermined contact surface among the plurality of support portions is two, the actual support region is a straight line region formed by connecting contact points between each of the two predetermined support portions and the predetermined contact surface.
[Claim 5] (Currently Amended) The mobile robot according to claim 1,wherein the plurality of propulsion units are arranged in line symmetry or point symmetry with respect to the main body portion when viewed from direction of gravity of the main body portion.
[Claim 6] (Currently) The mobile robot according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of support portions are a plurality of leg portions attached to the main body portion so as to be capable of supporting weight of the main body portion.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoshide (US Pub. No.: 2021/0047035 A1: hereinafter “Hoshide”).
Consider claim 1:
Hoshide teaches a mobile robot (Fig. 1 element 1 “A flying robot”), comprising: a main body portion having a plurality of propulsion units each configured to generate a propulsion force by driving of a rotary wing (See Hoshide, e.g., “…A flying robot executing predetermined work, the flying robot comprising: a body unit; and a propulsion portion comprising a plurality of propulsion units configured to cause propulsion to occur by driving rotor blades, the plurality of propulsion units being provided on the body unit; the flying robot further comprising: a contact support unit configured to contact a predetermined contact surface to be capable of supporting at least a part of the body unit; a sensor configured to detect an inclination of the body unit; and a control unit configured to, when the contact support unit contacts the predetermined contact surface, and the predetermined work is being performed, execute posture control to drive at least one of the plurality of propulsion units based on the inclination of the body unit detected by the sensor so that the inclination of the body unit is kept within a predetermined angle range…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108); a plurality of support portions provided on the main body portion and configured to come into contact with a predetermined contact surface to be capable of supporting at least a part of the main body portion (See Hoshide, e.g., “…The lower-side body unit 3 has two leg units 30 configured to be capable of executing walking work as predetermined work by the flying robot 1…Each leg unit 30 has a grounding unit 31 that grounds when the flying robot 1 walks by walking work, a first link unit 32 that is relatively rotatably connected with the grounding unit 31 via a joint, a second link unit 33 that is relatively rotatably connected with the first link unit 32 via a joint, a hip joint unit 34 that is relatively rotatably connected with the second link unit 33 via a joint, and a plurality of actuators (not illustrated) that drive-control rotation of the joints. A rotation direction of each of these joints is designed according to assumed walking work… the leg units 30 connected with the lower-side body 35, walking work as predetermined work is realized by actuators for driving the joints, which are provided inside the two leg units 30, respectively, being controlled in linkage with each other. Further, when work other than the walking work is assumed for the leg units 30…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108); a first controller configured to perform movement control for moving the main body portion on the predetermined contact surface by the plurality of support portions while supporting the main body portion by the plurality of support portions (See Hoshide, e.g., “…The walking control unit 310 is a functional unit that controls the actuators provided for the two leg units 30 for walking of the flying robot 1 when the flying robot 1 walks. The walking control unit 310 controls the leg units 30 based on environmental information related to a walking state of the lower-side body unit 3 and the like…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108); and a second controller (Fig. 2 element 211” The posture control unit 211”) configured to perform assist control for the movement control by the first controller by using a part or all of the plurality of propulsion units (See Hoshide, e.g., “…The posture control unit 211 is a functional unit that executes posture control to maintain the posture of the flying robot 1 when the flying robot 1 is performing walking work, which is predetermined work, by a walking control unit 310 on the lower-side body unit 3 side described later to be in a state suitable for the walking work…The posture control is realized mainly by a predetermined control program being executed in the control device 200 while the upper-side body unit 2 and the lower-side body unit 3 are in linkage with each other…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108); wherein the second controller (Fig. 2 element 211” The posture control unit 211”) drives the plurality of propulsion units in the assist control to adjust a load applied to the predetermined contact surface via predetermined support portions in contact with the predetermined contact surface among the plurality of support portions (See Hoshide, e.g., “…execute posture control to drive at least one of the plurality of propulsion units based on the inclination of the body unit detected by the sensor so that the inclination of the body unit is kept within a predetermined angle range…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108).
Consider claim 2:
Hoshide teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1 above. In addition, Hoshide teaches wherein the second controller adjusts the load such that (See Hoshide, e.g., “…The posture control unit 211 is a functional unit that executes posture control to maintain the posture of the flying robot 1 when the flying robot 1 is performing walking work, which is predetermined work, by a walking control unit 310 on the lower-side body unit 3 side described later to be in a state suitable for the walking work…The posture control is realized mainly by a predetermined control program being executed in the control device 200 while the upper-side body unit 2 and the lower-side body unit 3 are in linkage with each other…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108), when a target pressure position related to a shift in the center of gravity of the main body portion in the movement control is not inside an actual support region in which the main body portion is actually supported by the predetermined support portions, the target pressure position is displaced inside the actual support region (See Hoshide, e.g., “…execute posture control to drive at least one of the plurality of propulsion units based on the inclination of the body unit detected by the sensor so that the inclination of the body unit is kept within a predetermined angle range…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108).
Consider claim 3:
Hoshide teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 2 above. In addition, Hoshide teaches further comprising a detection unit configured to detect a friction condition on the predetermined contact surface (See Hoshide, e.g., “…The posture control unit 211 is a functional unit that executes posture control to maintain the posture of the flying robot 1 when the flying robot 1 is performing walking work, which is predetermined work, by a walking control unit 310 on the lower-side body unit 3 side described later to be in a state suitable for the walking work…The posture control is realized mainly by a predetermined control program being executed in the control device 200 while the upper-side body unit 2 and the lower-side body unit 3 are in linkage with each other…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108), wherein the second controller adjusts the load based on the friction condition detected by the detection unit (See Hoshide, e.g., “…execute posture control to drive at least one of the plurality of propulsion units based on the inclination of the body unit detected by the sensor so that the inclination of the body unit is kept within a predetermined angle range…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108).
Consider claim 5:
Hoshide teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1 above. In addition, Hoshide teaches wherein the plurality of propulsion units are arranged in line symmetry or point symmetry (Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310) with respect to the main body portion when viewed from the direction of gravity of the main body portion (See Hoshide, e.g., “…The lower-side body unit 3 has two leg units 30 configured to be capable of executing walking work as predetermined work by the flying robot 1…Each leg unit 30 has a grounding unit 31 that grounds when the flying robot 1 walks by walking work, a first link unit 32 that is relatively rotatably connected with the grounding unit 31 via a joint, a second link unit 33 that is relatively rotatably connected with the first link unit 32 via a joint, a hip joint unit 34 that is relatively rotatably connected with the second link unit 33 via a joint, and a plurality of actuators (not illustrated) that drive-control rotation of the joints. A rotation direction of each of these joints is designed according to assumed walking work… the leg units 30 connected with the lower-side body 35, walking work as predetermined work is realized by actuators for driving the joints, which are provided inside the two leg units 30, respectively, being controlled in linkage with each other. Further, when work other than the walking work is assumed for the leg units 30…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108).
Consider claim 6:
Hoshide teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1 above. In addition, Hoshide teaches wherein the plurality of support portions arc a plurality of leg portions attached to the main body portion so as to be capable of supporting the weight of the main body portion (See Hoshide, e.g., “…The lower-side body unit 3 has two leg units 30 configured to be capable of executing walking work as predetermined work by the flying robot 1…Each leg unit 30 has a grounding unit 31 that grounds when the flying robot 1 walks by walking work, a first link unit 32 that is relatively rotatably connected with the grounding unit 31 via a joint, a second link unit 33 that is relatively rotatably connected with the first link unit 32 via a joint, a hip joint unit 34 that is relatively rotatably connected with the second link unit 33 via a joint, and a plurality of actuators (not illustrated) that drive-control rotation of the joints. A rotation direction of each of these joints is designed according to assumed walking work… the leg units 30 connected with the lower-side body 35, walking work as predetermined work is realized by actuators for driving the joints, which are provided inside the two leg units 30, respectively, being controlled in linkage with each other. Further, when work other than the walking work is assumed for the leg units 30…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108).
Consider claim 7:
Hoshide teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 6 above. In addition, Hoshide teaches wherein the plurality of support portions further comprise a holding portion capable of holding an object, or the object held by the holding portion so as to be capable of coming into contact with the predetermined contact surface (See Hoshide, e.g., “…The lower-side body unit 3 has two leg units 30 configured to be capable of executing walking work as predetermined work by the flying robot 1…Each leg unit 30 has a grounding unit 31 that grounds when the flying robot 1 walks by walking work, a first link unit 32 that is relatively rotatably connected with the grounding unit 31 via a joint, a second link unit 33 that is relatively rotatably connected with the first link unit 32 via a joint, a hip joint unit 34 that is relatively rotatably connected with the second link unit 33 via a joint, and a plurality of actuators (not illustrated) that drive-control rotation of the joints. A rotation direction of each of these joints is designed according to assumed walking work… the leg units 30 connected with the lower-side body 35, walking work as predetermined work is realized by actuators for driving the joints, which are provided inside the two leg units 30, respectively, being controlled in linkage with each other. Further, when work other than the walking work is assumed for the leg units 30…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0010]-¶ [0011], ¶ [0019]-¶ [0053], ¶ [0056]-¶ [0061], and Figs. 1-3, 5-6 elements 1-310, Fig. 4 steps S101-S108, Figs. 6-11 elements 4-7, 1100-1103, and steps S101-S108).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Further, the prior art on record fails to teach or suggest, either in singularity or in combination, the claimed subject matter of claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wurden (US Pub. No.: 2022/0339983 A1) teaches “Walking VTOL vehicles and related systems and methods are disclosed. A representative system can include one or more vertical thrust propulsion systems for providing vertical thrust for the vehicle, one or more horizontal thrust propulsion systems for providing horizontal thrust for the vehicle, and leg elements that are rotatable between a first configuration in which each leg element extends downwardly and a second configuration different from the first configuration. A representative method of operating a vehicle includes using vertical thrust to raise the vehicle upward, rotating a leg element forward, lowering the vehicle, and then rotating the leg element rearward to propel the vehicle forward.”
명현 (KR 102150159 B1) teaches “The present invention relates to a wall-moving drone unit and a control method for maintaining and managing a high-rise building that climbs and cleans the wall of a structure using an auxiliary drive module (Arm), and relates to a wall moving, wall cleaning, charging, and robot control station communication. It can provide automation and unattended.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BABAR SARWAR whose telephone number is (571)270-5584. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00 AM-5:00 PM.
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, Faris S. Almatrahi can be reached on (313)446-4821. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free)? If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BABAR SARWAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights