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 12/04/2025 and 01/19/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 3-6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 3, “The control method of a moving body according to Claim 1…” should be “The control method of the moving body according to Claim 1…”
In claim 4, “The control method of a moving body according to Claim 1…” should be “The control method of the moving body according to Claim 1…”
In claim 5, “The control method of a moving body according to Claim 1…” should be “The control method of the moving body according to Claim 1…”
In claim 6, “The control method of a moving body according to Claim 5…” should be “The control method of the moving body according to Claim 5…”
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 5-6 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 5, the claim recites “a step of correcting positions of the claws with respect to the target object by moving the claws in a direction intersecting an extending direction of the claws in a state where the claws are inserted into the opening, based on the detected deviation amount.” However, antecedent basis exists in claim 1, upon which claim 5 depends, for “a step of detecting deviation amounts of the claws inserted into the opening,” Here, antecedent basis exists for plural deviation amounts, while claim 5 appears to suggest that only a single (i.e. the detected deviation amount) deviation amount is detected. Therefore, it is unclear as to how many deviation amounts are intended to be detected.
Claim 6 is dependent upon claim 5 and therefore inherits the above-described deficiencies. Accordingly, claim 6 is rejected under similar reasoning as claim 5 above.
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, 3, 5-6, and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koide et al. (US 2023/0110512 A1), hereinafter Koide, in view of Guo (CN 112325847 A ).
Regarding claim 1, Koide teaches a control method of a moving body that includes a pair of claws for holding a target object which is a transport target, the control method comprising:
a step of inserting the claws into an opening formed in the target object;
Koide teaches ([0010]): " In a general aspect, a forklift is provided that includes a vehicle body, a fork, a moving device, a lift device, a tilt device, a sensor, and processing circuitry. The fork is configured to mount a pallet. An opening into which the fork is inserted when the pallet is mounted on the fork is an insertion opening. The fork includes an insertion portion that is inserted into the insertion opening." Koide further teaches ([0081]): "As shown in FIG. 6, when the process for properly inserting the insertion portions 231 into the insertion opening IH is started, the controlling device 30 executes an insertion process in step S101. The insertion process is a process in which the controlling device 30 controls the moving device to insert the insertion portions 231 of the forks 23 into the insertion opening IH. "
a step of detecting inclination angles of the claws inserted into the opening with respect to the target object;
Koide teaches ([0059]): "The vehicle speed sensor 53 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal SV, which corresponds to the vehicle speed of the forklift 10 when the forklift 10 is traveling. The reach sensor 54 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal Sr, which corresponds to a movement amount Pr of the mast assemblies 21 when the mast assemblies 21 are moved by the reach cylinder 24. The lift sensor 55 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal SL, which corresponds to a height PL of the forks 23, which have been lifted or lowered by the lift cylinder 25. The tilt sensor 56 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal Sθ, which corresponds to a tilt angle θ of the lift bracket 22, which has been tilted by the tilt cylinder 26. The tilt angle θ is an inclination angle of the lift bracket 22 with respect to the first direction A." FIG. 1, included below, demonstrates that the forks 23 are attached to lift bracket 22. Thus, the tilt angle θ corresponds to the inclination angles of the claws.
PNG
media_image1.png
572
750
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and a step of detecting deviation amounts of the claws inserted into the opening,
Koide teaches ([0082]): "In step S102, the controlling device 30 determines whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1. When determining that the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: YES), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S103. A case in which it is determined that the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: YES) is a case in which the proximity detecting unit 33a has output the first result." Koide further teaches ([0084]): "When determining that the insertion portions 231 have not approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: NO), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S105." Here, the Examiner has interpreted the step of detecting whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 as amounting to a step of detecting deviation amounts of the claws inserted into the opening.
wherein in the step of detecting the inclination angles, the inclination angles are calculated based on a time difference between times when respective base end portions of the claws and the target object come into contact with each other…
Koide teaches ([0057]): "The first sensor 51 and the second sensor 52 are provided at the distal end of the insertion portion 231 of a fork 23." ([0058]): "The first sensor 51 and the second sensor 52 are, for example, reflective photoelectronic sensors… The first sensor 51 and the second sensor 52 may be changed to proximity sensors, distance sensors, limit switches, force sensors, or contact sensors." Koide further teaches ([0068]): "The proximity detecting unit 33a receives the signal S1 of the first sensor 51 and the signal S2 of the second sensor 52. " Koide further teaches ([0082]): "In step S102, the controlling device 30 determines whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1." Koide further teaches ([0085]): "When determining that the insertion portions 231 have not approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: NO), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S105." Koide further teaches ([0085]): "In step S105, the controlling device 30 determines whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the second facing surface IH2. Step S105 is executed by the proximity detecting unit 33a. When determining that the insertion portions 231 have approached the second facing surface IH2 in step S105 (step S105: YES), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S103." Koide further teaches ([0085]): " In step S103, the controlling device 30 executes a stopping process. After executing step S103, the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S104. In step S104, the controlling device 30 executes an avoidance process. " Koide further teaches ([0103]): "As shown in FIG. 10, the controlling device 30 first executes step S201 in the avoidance process. The controlling device 30 calculates the target tilt angle θ* in step S201. Step S201 is executed by the target position calculating unit 33c. In step S201, the controlling device 30 calculates the target tilt angle θ* by adding an angle Δθ to the tilt angle θ, which has been output by the position calculating unit 33b." Here, steps S102 and S105 occur at different points in time. Therefore, the Examiner has interpreted a determination of NO on step S102 and a determination of YES in step S105 as detecting whether the respective base end portions of the claws and the target object come into contact with each other at different times. Steps S103 and S104 follow from step S105 and result in the detection of the inclination angle.
However, Koide does not outright teach that the inclination angles are also calculated based on a speed at which the claws are inserted into the opening. Guo teaches a forklift inclination angle measuring method, equipment, and device, comprising:
...and on a speed at which the claws are inserted into the opening.
Guo teaches ([0082]): "This embodiment obtains the fork acceleration and fork angular velocity information of the forklift, determines the current angle information of the forklift fork based on the fork acceleration and fork angular velocity information, obtains the mast acceleration and mast angular velocity information of the forklift, determines the current angle information of the forklift mast based on the mast acceleration and mast angular velocity information, and determines the relative tilt angle between the forklift and mast based on the current angle information of the forklift fork and the current angle information of the forklift mast. Since the relative tilt angle between the forks and the mast is determined based on the current angle information of the forklift forks and the current angle information of the forklift mast, this embodiment achieves more accurate measurement of the forklift tilt angle compared to the prior art, which is prone to causing goods to fall and the forklift to tip over due to operational errors when manually operating the forklift fork angle. This can prevent the forklift from tipping over and damaging the goods when the forklift is automatically picking up and placing goods."
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 Koide to incorporate the teachings of Guo to provide that the inclination angles are also calculated based on a speed at which the claws are inserted into the opening. Koide and Guo are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of forklift control systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Guo, as determining the inclination angles based on the fork angular velocity information allows for more accurate measurement of the forklift tilt angle, and can help prevent the forklift from tipping over and damaging the goods when the forklift is picking up and placing goods, as recognized by Guo (see at least [0082]).
Regarding claim 3, Koide and Guo teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 1. Koide further teaches:
in the step of detecting the deviation amounts of the claws, the deviation amounts of the claws are calculated based on a movement distance until the claws are moved in a direction intersecting an extending direction of the claws in a state where the claws are inserted into the opening and a tip portion of one claw comes into contact with an inner wall of the opening.
Koide teaches ([0082]): "In step S102, the controlling device 30 determines whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1. When determining that the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: YES), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S103. A case in which it is determined that the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: YES) is a case in which the proximity detecting unit 33a has output the first result." Koide further teaches ([0010]): "The sensor is provided in the insertion portion and is configured to detect a proximity state, in which the insertion portion has approached the facing surface to such an extent that a distance between the insertion portion and the facing surface is less than or equal to a specified value."
Regarding claim 5, Koide and Guo teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 1. Koide further teaches:
a step of correcting positions of the claws with respect to the target object by moving the claws in a direction intersecting an extending direction of the claws in a state where the claws are inserted into the opening, based on the detected deviation amount.
Koide teaches ([0088]): "When determining that the avoidance process has been executed in step S106 (step S106: YES), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S109. That is, the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S109 when determining that the tilt angle θ, which has been calculated by the position calculating unit 33b, is not 0 (step S106: YES)." Koide further teaches ([0089]): "In step S109, the controlling device 30 determines whether the forks 23 are tilted forward together with the lift bracket 22. The controlling device 30 determines whether the tilt angle θ, which has been calculated by the position calculating unit 33b, is less than 0. When determining that the forks 23 are tilted forward in step S109 (step S109: YES), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S110." Koide even further teaches ([0091]): "In each of step S110 and step S111, the controlling device 30 simultaneously executes an insertion process and an adjustment process. The adjustment process executed in step S110 is a process that controls the lift device to lift the forks 23." The Examiner has interpreted lifting the forks as amounting to moving the claws in a direction intersecting an extending direction of the claws in a state where the claws are inserted into the opening.
Regarding claim 6, Koide and Guo teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 5. Koide further teaches:
in the step of correcting the positions of the claws, the claws are moved to positions where the deviation amounts are less than a predetermined threshold value.
Koide teaches ([0091]): "In each of step S110 and step S111, the controlling device 30 simultaneously executes an insertion process and an adjustment process. The adjustment process executed in step S110 is a process that controls the lift device to lift the forks 23. The adjustment process executed in step S111 is a process that controls the lift device to lower the forks 23. After executing step S110 or step S111, the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S108." Koide further teaches ([0092]): " In step S108, the controlling device 30 determines whether an inserted amount Din of the insertion portions 231 into the insertion opening IH is greater than or equal to a prescribed value Dth. The inserted amount Din represents the length by which the insertion portions 231 are inserted into the insertion opening IH. The controlling device 30 calculates the inserted amount Din." Koide even further teaches ([0095]): "When determining that the inserted amount Din is not greater than or equal to the prescribed value Dth in step S108 (step S108: NO), the controlling device 30 returns the process to step S102 again. "
Regarding claim 8, Koide teaches a moving body that includes a pair of claws for holding a target object which is a transport target, the moving body comprising:
a fork control unit that inserts the claws into an opening formed in the target object;
Koide teaches ([0010]): " In a general aspect, a forklift is provided that includes a vehicle body, a fork, a moving device, a lift device, a tilt device, a sensor, and processing circuitry. The fork is configured to mount a pallet. An opening into which the fork is inserted when the pallet is mounted on the fork is an insertion opening. The fork includes an insertion portion that is inserted into the insertion opening." Koide further teaches ([0081]): "As shown in FIG. 6, when the process for properly inserting the insertion portions 231 into the insertion opening IH is started, the controlling device 30 executes an insertion process in step S101. The insertion process is a process in which the controlling device 30 controls the moving device to insert the insertion portions 231 of the forks 23 into the insertion opening IH. "
an inclination angle detecting unit that detects inclination angles of the claws inserted into the opening with respect to the target object;
Koide teaches ([0059]): "The vehicle speed sensor 53 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal SV, which corresponds to the vehicle speed of the forklift 10 when the forklift 10 is traveling. The reach sensor 54 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal Sr, which corresponds to a movement amount Pr of the mast assemblies 21 when the mast assemblies 21 are moved by the reach cylinder 24. The lift sensor 55 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal SL, which corresponds to a height PL of the forks 23, which have been lifted or lowered by the lift cylinder 25. The tilt sensor 56 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal Sθ, which corresponds to a tilt angle θ of the lift bracket 22, which has been tilted by the tilt cylinder 26. The tilt angle θ is an inclination angle of the lift bracket 22 with respect to the first direction A." FIG. 1, included above, demonstrates that the forks 23 are attached to lift bracket 22. Thus, the tilt angle θ corresponds to the inclination angles of the claws.
and a deviation amount detecting unit that detects deviation amounts of the claws inserted into the opening,
Koide teaches ([0082]): "In step S102, the controlling device 30 determines whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1. When determining that the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: YES), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S103. A case in which it is determined that the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: YES) is a case in which the proximity detecting unit 33a has output the first result." Koide further teaches ([0084]): "When determining that the insertion portions 231 have not approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: NO), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S105." Here, the Examiner has interpreted the step of detecting whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 as amounting to a step of detecting deviation amounts of the claws inserted into the opening.
wherein the inclination angle detecting unit calculates the inclination angles based on a time difference between times when respective base end portions of the claws and the target object come into contact with each other…
Koide teaches ([0057]): "The first sensor 51 and the second sensor 52 are provided at the distal end of the insertion portion 231 of a fork 23." ([0058]): "The first sensor 51 and the second sensor 52 are, for example, reflective photoelectronic sensors… The first sensor 51 and the second sensor 52 may be changed to proximity sensors, distance sensors, limit switches, force sensors, or contact sensors." Koide further teaches ([0068]): "The proximity detecting unit 33a receives the signal S1 of the first sensor 51 and the signal S2 of the second sensor 52. " Koide further teaches ([0082]): "In step S102, the controlling device 30 determines whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1." Koide further teaches ([0085]): "When determining that the insertion portions 231 have not approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: NO), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S105." Koide further teaches ([0085]): "In step S105, the controlling device 30 determines whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the second facing surface IH2. Step S105 is executed by the proximity detecting unit 33a. When determining that the insertion portions 231 have approached the second facing surface IH2 in step S105 (step S105: YES), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S103." Koide further teaches ([0085]): " In step S103, the controlling device 30 executes a stopping process. After executing step S103, the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S104. In step S104, the controlling device 30 executes an avoidance process. " Koide further teaches ([0103]): "As shown in FIG. 10, the controlling device 30 first executes step S201 in the avoidance process. The controlling device 30 calculates the target tilt angle θ* in step S201. Step S201 is executed by the target position calculating unit 33c. In step S201, the controlling device 30 calculates the target tilt angle θ* by adding an angle Δθ to the tilt angle θ, which has been output by the position calculating unit 33b." Here, steps S102 and S105 occur at different points in time. Therefore, the Examiner has interpreted a determination of NO on step S102 and a determination of YES in step S105 as detecting whether the respective base end portions of the claws and the target object come into contact with each other at different times. Steps S103 and S104 follow from step S105 and result in the detection of the inclination angle.
However, Koide does not outright teach that the inclination angles are also calculated based on a speed at which the claws are inserted into the opening. Guo teaches a forklift inclination angle measuring method, equipment, and device, comprising:
...and on a speed at which the claws are inserted into the opening.
Guo teaches ([0082]): "This embodiment obtains the fork acceleration and fork angular velocity information of the forklift, determines the current angle information of the forklift fork based on the fork acceleration and fork angular velocity information, obtains the mast acceleration and mast angular velocity information of the forklift, determines the current angle information of the forklift mast based on the mast acceleration and mast angular velocity information, and determines the relative tilt angle between the forklift and mast based on the current angle information of the forklift fork and the current angle information of the forklift mast. Since the relative tilt angle between the forks and the mast is determined based on the current angle information of the forklift forks and the current angle information of the forklift mast, this embodiment achieves more accurate measurement of the forklift tilt angle compared to the prior art, which is prone to causing goods to fall and the forklift to tip over due to operational errors when manually operating the forklift fork angle. This can prevent the forklift from tipping over and damaging the goods when the forklift is automatically picking up and placing goods."
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 Koide to incorporate the teachings of Guo to provide that the inclination angles are also calculated based on a speed at which the claws are inserted into the opening. Koide and Guo are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of forklift control systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Guo, as determining the inclination angles based on the fork angular velocity information allows for more accurate measurement of the forklift tilt angle, and can help prevent the forklift from tipping over and damaging the goods when the forklift is picking up and placing goods, as recognized by Guo (see at least [0082]).
Regarding claim 9, Koide teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium (“storage unit 32, which includes… ROM”, [0061]) having stored thereon a program (“program codes or commands configured to cause the processor 31 to execute processes”, [0061]) causing a computer to execute a control method of a moving body that includes a pair of claws for holding a target object which is a transport target, the program causing the computer to execute:
a step of inserting the claws into an opening formed in the target object;
Koide teaches ([0010]): " In a general aspect, a forklift is provided that includes a vehicle body, a fork, a moving device, a lift device, a tilt device, a sensor, and processing circuitry. The fork is configured to mount a pallet. An opening into which the fork is inserted when the pallet is mounted on the fork is an insertion opening. The fork includes an insertion portion that is inserted into the insertion opening." Koide further teaches ([0081]): "As shown in FIG. 6, when the process for properly inserting the insertion portions 231 into the insertion opening IH is started, the controlling device 30 executes an insertion process in step S101. The insertion process is a process in which the controlling device 30 controls the moving device to insert the insertion portions 231 of the forks 23 into the insertion opening IH. "
a step of detecting inclination angles of the claws inserted into the opening with respect to the target object;
Koide teaches ([0059]): "The vehicle speed sensor 53 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal SV, which corresponds to the vehicle speed of the forklift 10 when the forklift 10 is traveling. The reach sensor 54 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal Sr, which corresponds to a movement amount Pr of the mast assemblies 21 when the mast assemblies 21 are moved by the reach cylinder 24. The lift sensor 55 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal SL, which corresponds to a height PL of the forks 23, which have been lifted or lowered by the lift cylinder 25. The tilt sensor 56 outputs to the controlling device 30 a signal Sθ, which corresponds to a tilt angle θ of the lift bracket 22, which has been tilted by the tilt cylinder 26. The tilt angle θ is an inclination angle of the lift bracket 22 with respect to the first direction A." FIG. 1, included above, demonstrates that the forks 23 are attached to lift bracket 22. Thus, the tilt angle θ corresponds to the inclination angles of the claws.
and a step of detecting deviation amounts of the claws inserted into the opening,
Koide teaches ([0082]): "In step S102, the controlling device 30 determines whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1. When determining that the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: YES), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S103. A case in which it is determined that the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: YES) is a case in which the proximity detecting unit 33a has output the first result." Koide further teaches ([0084]): "When determining that the insertion portions 231 have not approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: NO), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S105." Here, the Examiner has interpreted the step of detecting whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1 as amounting to a step of detecting deviation amounts of the claws inserted into the opening.
wherein in the step of detecting the inclination angles, the inclination angles are calculated based on a time difference between times when respective base end portions of the claws and the target object come into contact with each other…
Koide teaches ([0057]): "The first sensor 51 and the second sensor 52 are provided at the distal end of the insertion portion 231 of a fork 23." ([0058]): "The first sensor 51 and the second sensor 52 are, for example, reflective photoelectronic sensors… The first sensor 51 and the second sensor 52 may be changed to proximity sensors, distance sensors, limit switches, force sensors, or contact sensors." Koide further teaches ([0068]): "The proximity detecting unit 33a receives the signal S1 of the first sensor 51 and the signal S2 of the second sensor 52. " Koide further teaches ([0082]): "In step S102, the controlling device 30 determines whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the first facing surface IH1." Koide further teaches ([0085]): "When determining that the insertion portions 231 have not approached the first facing surface IH1 in step S102 (step S102: NO), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S105." Koide further teaches ([0085]): "In step S105, the controlling device 30 determines whether the insertion portions 231 have approached the second facing surface IH2. Step S105 is executed by the proximity detecting unit 33a. When determining that the insertion portions 231 have approached the second facing surface IH2 in step S105 (step S105: YES), the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S103." Koide further teaches ([0085]): " In step S103, the controlling device 30 executes a stopping process. After executing step S103, the controlling device 30 advances the process to step S104. In step S104, the controlling device 30 executes an avoidance process. " Koide further teaches ([0103]): "As shown in FIG. 10, the controlling device 30 first executes step S201 in the avoidance process. The controlling device 30 calculates the target tilt angle θ* in step S201. Step S201 is executed by the target position calculating unit 33c. In step S201, the controlling device 30 calculates the target tilt angle θ* by adding an angle Δθ to the tilt angle θ, which has been output by the position calculating unit 33b." Here, steps S102 and S105 occur at different points in time. Therefore, the Examiner has interpreted a determination of NO on step S102 and a determination of YES in step S105 as detecting whether the respective base end portions of the claws and the target object come into contact with each other at different times. Steps S103 and S104 follow from step S105 and result in the detection of the inclination angle.
However, Koide does not outright teach that the inclination angles are also calculated based on a speed at which the claws are inserted into the opening. Guo teaches a forklift inclination angle measuring method, equipment, and device, comprising:
...and on a speed at which the claws are inserted into the opening.
Guo teaches ([0082]): "This embodiment obtains the fork acceleration and fork angular velocity information of the forklift, determines the current angle information of the forklift fork based on the fork acceleration and fork angular velocity information, obtains the mast acceleration and mast angular velocity information of the forklift, determines the current angle information of the forklift mast based on the mast acceleration and mast angular velocity information, and determines the relative tilt angle between the forklift and mast based on the current angle information of the forklift fork and the current angle information of the forklift mast. Since the relative tilt angle between the forks and the mast is determined based on the current angle information of the forklift forks and the current angle information of the forklift mast, this embodiment achieves more accurate measurement of the forklift tilt angle compared to the prior art, which is prone to causing goods to fall and the forklift to tip over due to operational errors when manually operating the forklift fork angle. This can prevent the forklift from tipping over and damaging the goods when the forklift is automatically picking up and placing goods."
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 Koide to incorporate the teachings of Guo to provide that the inclination angles are also calculated based on a speed at which the claws are inserted into the opening. Koide and Guo are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of forklift control systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Guo, as determining the inclination angles based on the fork angular velocity information allows for more accurate measurement of the forklift tilt angle, and can help prevent the forklift from tipping over and damaging the goods when the forklift is picking up and placing goods, as recognized by Guo (see at least [0082]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koide and Guo in view of Flottran (US 2020/0317490 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Koide and Guo teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 1. However, Koide does not outright teach that in the step of detecting the deviation amounts of the claws, the deviation amounts of the claws are calculated based on a separation distance acquired by emitting light from light sensors provided on the claws to an inner wall of the opening in a state where the claws are inserted into the opening and receiving reflected light from the inner wall. Flottran teaches an industrial truck including a load fork, comprising:
in the step of detecting the deviation amounts of the claws, the deviation amounts of the claws are calculated based on a separation distance acquired by emitting light from light sensors provided on the claws to an inner wall of the opening in a state where the claws are inserted into the opening and receiving reflected light from the inner wall.
Flottran teaches ([0068]): "In the exemplary embodiment according to FIGS. 5a to 7b, a pallet 30 is arranged on the load fork 4 as the load carrier. In contrast to the exemplary embodiment in FIGS. 2a to 4b, when the pallet 30 is arranged on the load fork 4, the laser probe 12 arranged on the fork back 6 and the laser distance measuring sensor 14 are operated at the same time. " Flottran further teaches ([0069]): "When the load fork 4 approaches the pallet 30, the laser probe 12 and the laser distance measuring sensor 14 are both initially in the “false” state (cf. FIG. 5a). When the fork arms 8a, 8b are inserted underneath the pallet 30, the horizontal spacing distance between the fork back 6 or laser distance measuring sensor 14 and the front face of the pallet 30 facing the fork back 6 is measured or detected by means of the laser distance measuring sensor 14. When a minimum spacing distance for the pallet 30 on the load fork 4 detected by means of the laser distance measuring sensor 14 is reached, the state of the laser distance measuring sensor 14 changes from the “false” state to the “true” state." Flottran even further teaches ([0071]): "If the pallet 30 enters the measurement region of the laser probe 12, the state of the laser probe 12 changes to the “true” state (cf. FIG. 7a, 7b). The state change of the laser probe 12 is transmitted to the processing unit 16 as a signal, such that, based on the two state changes of the laser probe 12 and the laser distance measuring sensor 14, the processing unit 16 determines that the pallet 30 is arranged in the correct pickup position on the load fork 4 for transportation by means of the industrial truck 2."
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 Koide and Guo to incorporate the teachings of Flottran to provide that in the step of detecting the deviation amounts of the claws, the deviation amounts of the claws are calculated based on a separation distance acquired by emitting light from light sensors provided on the claws to an inner wall of the opening in a state where the claws are inserted into the opening and receiving reflected light from the inner wall. Koide, Guo, and Flottran are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of forklift control systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Flottran, as incorporating the light sensor-based detection of the deviation amounts advantageously allows for confirming that a pallet is arranged in a correct pickup position on the fork(s) for transportation, as recognized by Flottran (see at least [0071]).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koide and Guo in view of Takao et al. (JP 2021-135800 A), hereinafter Takao.
Regarding claim 7, Koide and Guo teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 1. However, Koide does not outright teach a step of unloading the target object in a placement region. Guo further teaches:
and a step of unloading the target object in the placement region.
Guo teaches ([0081]): "In practice, the onboard computer can determine the relative tilt angle between the forks and the mast based on the real-time tilt angle of the forks and the mast. The onboard computer can then control the angle required for the forklift forks to tilt forward and backward when picking up or placing goods, based on the relative tilt angle between the forks and the mast."
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 Koide and Guo to further incorporate the teachings of Guo to provide a step of unloading the target object in the placement region. Koide and Guo are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of forklift control systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Guo, as the angle control of Guo can help prevent the forklift from tipping over and damaging the goods when the forklift is picking up and placing goods, as recognized by Guo (see at least [0082]).
However, neither Koide nor Guo outright teach a step of acquiring a route toward a placement region where the target object is unloaded, which is set based on the detected inclination angles and the detected deviation amounts; and a step of moving the moving body along the route. Takao teaches a moving body movement control system, comprising:
a step of acquiring a route toward a placement region where the target object is unloaded, which is set based on the detected inclination angles and the detected deviation amounts;
Takao teaches ([0038]): "The trajectory setting unit 80 (see Figure 5) sets the trajectory TR from the starting position AR1 (the moving object 10 at the starting position AR1) to the target position and attitude AR2. The trajectory setting unit 80 sets the target position and attitude AR2 based on the position information of pallet P acquired by the target information acquisition unit 74, that is, based on the position and orientation of pallet P. In other words, based on the position and orientation of pallet P, the position and orientation at which pallet P can be picked up (where the fork 24 can be inserted into the opening Pb of pallet P by moving in a straight line) are calculated and set as the target position and orientation AR2." Takao further teaches ([0050]): "Once the trajectory TR is set as described above, the movement control unit 72 (see Figure 5) moves the moving body 10 from the starting position AR1 to the target position/attitude AR2 so as to follow the trajectory TR. Then, the movement control unit 72 moves the moving body 10 in a straight line from the target position and orientation AR2, inserts the fork 24 into the opening Pb of the pallet P, and picks up the pallet P. The movement control unit 72 causes the mobile body 10, which has picked up the pallet P, to be transported to the set destination."
a step of moving the moving body along the route;
Takao teaches ([0050]): "Once the trajectory TR is set as described above, the movement control unit 72 (see Figure 5) moves the moving body 10 from the starting position AR1 to the target position/attitude AR2 so as to follow the trajectory TR. Then, the movement control unit 72 moves the moving body 10 in a straight line from the target position and orientation AR2, inserts the fork 24 into the opening Pb of the pallet P, and picks up the pallet P. The movement control unit 72 causes the mobile body 10, which has picked up the pallet P, to be transported to the set destination."
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 Koide and Guo to incorporate the teachings of Takao to provide a step of acquiring a route toward a placement region where the target object is unloaded, which is set based on the detected inclination angles and the detected deviation amounts; and a step of moving the moving body along the route. Koide, Guo, and Takao are each directed towards similar pursuits in the field of forklift control systems. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it advantageous to incorporate the teachings of Takao, as the trajectory TR calculation of Takao carries the benefit of reduced computational load, as recognized by Takao (see at least [0054]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. (US 2018/0312382 A1) teaches a forklift system and control method thereof, including a step of measuring a distance between fork insertion holes formed in the pallet by using a laser sensor, and adjusting a distance between the forks according to the distance between the fork insertion holes (see at least [0025]). Taki et al. (US 2016/0101970 A1) teaches an apparatus for controlling a load handling device, including regulating a lifting speed of forklift forks based on a tilt angle of the mast assembly of the forklift (see at least [0050] and [0067]).
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
Prosecution Insights