DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
This first non-final action is in response to applicant's original filing on May 22, 2025. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been considered as follows.
Provisional Nonstatutory Double Patenting Rejection
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 8, 12, 14, 19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 11, 20 of copending Application No. 18/539,658 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because each of claims of present application can directly mapped to claim/claims of co-pending Application No. 18/539,658. See chart below.
Present Claims in U.S. Patent Application 19/216,612
Claims of co-pending U.S. Patent Application
18/539,658
1, 14, 19
1, 11, 20
8, 12
5
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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) 1-5, 8, 11, 13, 14, 16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maroney (US20200247609 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Maroney teaches a system, comprising: a sensor configured to detect objects on one or more sides of a refuse collection vehicle([0008] the plurality of sensors includes at least one of the group consisting of a mechanical plunger, a contact sensor, an analog sensor, a digital sensor, a RADAR sensor, a LIDAR sensor, an ultrasonic sensor, a controller area network bus sensor, or a camera);
an actuator assembly configured to actuate to engage a refuse can (130, 132 in Fig. 1C, 204 in Fig. 2A; [0011] Engaging the refuse container with a portion of the vehicle can include extending an arm of the refuse collection vehicle outward from a side of the refuse collection vehicle until the refuse container is detected by at least one of a plurality of sensors. In some cases, one or more grippers of the arm move toward the refuse container in response to detection of the refuse container by a sensor carried on the refuse collection vehicle. In some cases, one or more grippers continue to move toward the refuse container until a threshold pressure applied to the refuse container by the arm is reached. In some cases, the threshold pressure is adjustable by an operator of the vehicle) ; and
a controller configured to: detect, using a single-stage object detector, a presence of the refuse can ([0032]the optical sensor data is provided by a plurality of optical sensors on the vehicle positioned to detect the refuse container);
determine, based on data obtained by the sensor, a position of the refuse can with respect to the refuse collection vehicle ([0048], 602 in Fig. 6; [0005] positioning a refuse collection vehicle with respect to a refuse container to be emptied, [0007] Positioning the refuse collection vehicle with respect to a refuse container to be emptied may include positioning the refuse collection vehicle such that a plurality of sensors on the vehicle are positioned to detect the refuse container. [0120] In some implementations, the vehicle 202 is automatically positioned to engage a refuse container 230 based on the image captured by a camera 234(1) on the vehicle 202 and processed by a computing device (e.g. computing device 112). For example, a computing device can receive one or more images from camera 234(1), including the visual marker 404 previously discussed, process the image using machine learning based image processing techniques to determine the location of the refuse container 230 in the image relative to the visual marker 404, and, in response, send a signal to the vehicle 202 to automatically adjust the position of the vehicle such that the image of the container 230 is positioned within the visual marker 404. The automatic positioning of the vehicle based on processing the image(s) of the refuse container 230 by a computing device can be conducted automatically without operator involvement. For example, the vehicle can be automatically positioned in a fore-aft direction relative to the container 230 without an operator driving or positioning the vehicle based on signals provided by a computing device configured to process images received from camera 234(1). [0078] [0121] a dump cycle is automatically initiated based on a computing device determining that the vehicle is properly positioned to engage a refuse container 230. camera 234(1) can provide one or more images to a computing device of a computing system (e.g. computing device 112) and, as previously discussed, the computing device can use machine learning based image processing techniques to determine that an image of the container 230 is aligned with a visual marker 404, indicating proper vehicle alignment. After determining that the vehicle is properly aligned, the computing device can send a signal to the vehicle 202 to automatically initiate a dump cycle; [0130] upon detecting the refuse container 230, one or more grippers of the arm move toward the container. For example, the grippers of the grabber mechanism 204(2) of lift arm 204(1) begin moving toward the refuse container 230 in response to lift arm 204(1) extending outward and one or more container detection sensors 206(2), 206(3) detecting the refuse container 230; [0126]Whenever a location sensor on the vehicle 202 detects that the vehicle 202 is at, or within a threshold distance of, a previously determined and stored location of a container 230 to be emptied, the lift arm 204(1) and the grabber mechanism 204(2) can be automatically positioned into the previously stored arm and grabber mechanism positions associated with the vehicle's current GPS location in order to align the vehicle 202 for engaging the container 230; the vehicle position 202 and the position of the lift arm 204(1) and of the grabber mechanism 204(2) are adjusted based on feedback received from one or more can detection sensors 206(2), 206(3))[0113] Positioning the vehicle 202 with respect to the refuse container 230 involves positioning the vehicle 202 such that the grabber mechanism 204(2) is in position to engage the refuse container 230);
generate a trajectory that indicates a path of at least one of the actuator assembly or the refuse collection vehicle and that indicates an alignment between (i) the at([0149] the environmental monitoring sensors 160 can detect when an object has moved within the path of the lift arm 104(1), 204(1) while the vehicle 102, 202 is performing a dump cycle; [0073] the vehicle 102 is positioned based on data received from one or more optical sensors 106. For example, one or more optical sensors 106 can provide data to a computing device (e.g. computing device 112), and based on the data received from the one or more optical sensors 106, the computing device can send a signal to the vehicle 102 to automatically adjust the position of the vehicle 102 in order to position the vehicle 102 to engage a refuse container 130 detected by the one or more optical sensors 106. [0120] the automatic positioning of the vehicle based on processing the image(s) of the refuse container 230 by a computing device can be conducted automatically without operator involvement. the vehicle can be automatically positioned in a fore-aft direction relative to the container 230 without an operator driving or positioning the vehicle based on signals provided by a computing device configured to process images received from camera 234(1); [0114] a visual marker ); and
present, via a user interface, the trajectory ([0010] positioning the refuse collection vehicle with respect to a refuse container to be emptied includes positioning the refuse collection vehicle in a fore-aft direction while observing images on a graphical display within the vehicle obtained from a camera directed at the refuse container to align a feature of an image of the refuse container on the graphical display with a visual marker positioned on the graphical display [0018]-[0022],[0056],[0115] As shown in FIG. 4A, graphical display 220 displays image(s) and/or video of a refuse container 230 to be engaged by vehicle 202 and one or more visual markers 404. In some implementations, the visual markers are two guidelines positioned on the graphical display 220, and positioning the vehicle 202 involves moving the vehicle in a fore-aft direction to fit the image/video of the refuse container 230 between the visual markers 404. For example, as shown in FIG. 4A, positioning the vehicle 202 involves moving the vehicle in fore-aft direction such that the image/video of the refuse container 230 on graphical display 220 is aligned between each of the visual marker guidelines 404(1 a), 404(1 b) on graphical display 220.[0062]).
Regarding claims 14 and 19, please see the rejection above with regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Maroney teaches wherein the trajectory includes one or more first characteristics to indicate the alignment or includes one or more second characteristics to indicate unalignment (under 112 (a) rejection; [0114] a visual marker ( the trajectory) in Fig. 4A)).
Regarding claim 20, please see the rejection above with regarding claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Maroney teaches wherein the trajectory includes a line that extends from the at least one of the actuator assembly or the refuse collection vehicle and towards the refuse can to indicate the alignment ([0114] a visual marker in Fig. 4A).
Regarding claim 4, Maroney teaches wherein the controller is further configured to:
receive, via the user interface, a selection to accept the trajectory ([0005] engaging a switch to initiate a dump cycle to be performed by the refuse collection vehicle on the refuse container); and initiate a control action to cause the refuse collection vehicle to perform at least one operation to align the refuse collection vehicle with the refuse can ([0005] engaging a switch to initiate a dump cycle to be performed by the refuse collection vehicle on the refuse container. The dump cycle includes engaging the refuse container with a portion of the vehicle, lifting the engaged refuse container to a dump position, and moving the refuse container to release contents of the refuse container into a hopper of the refuse collection vehicle. The dump cycle continues to completion as long as the switch remains manually engaged).
Regarding claim 5, Maroney teaches further comprising: the user interface to include: a graphical representation of at least a portion of the refuse collection vehicle (the hopper 204(5) in Fig. 3B); and
a graphical representation of the refuse can (See Figs 4A/B and [0115] As shown in FIG. 4A, graphical display 220 displays image(s) and/or video of a refuse container 230 to be engaged by vehicle 202 and one or more visual markers 404. In some implementations, the visual markers are two guidelines positioned on the graphical display 220, and positioning the vehicle 202 involves moving the vehicle in a fore-aft direction to fit the image/video of the refuse container 230 between the visual markers 404. For example, as shown in FIG. 4A, positioning the vehicle 202 involves moving the vehicle in fore-aft direction such that the image/video of the refuse container 230 on graphical display 220 is aligned between each of the visual marker guidelines 404(1a), 404(1b) on graphical display 220.[0116] In some implementations, the visual marker 404 includes a third guideline 404(1c) disposed equidistant between the first guideline 404(1a) and second guideline 404(1b), and positioning the vehicle 202 includes aligning a centerline of the refuse container 230 in the image/video on the graphical display 220 with the third guideline 404(1c). The length of the visual marker guidelines 404(1a), 404(1b), 404(1c) on the graphical display 220 represent the furthest distance grabber mechanism 204(2) can reach to pick up a refuse container.[0117] In some implementations, the visual marker 404 is provided as a rectangle that represents the area in which the grabber mechanism of a side-loader vehicle can reach. For example, as depicted in FIG. 4B, visual marker 404 positioned on the graphical display 220 represents the area of reach of lift arm 204(1) and grabber mechanism 204(2) of vehicle 202, and positioning vehicle 202 involves moving the vehicle 202 in the fore-aft direction to position the image/video of refuse container 230 on the graphical display 220 within the visual marker 404(2) on graphical display 220).
Regarding claim 8, Maroney teaches wherein the sensor includes at least one camera ([0188] ), and wherein the controller is configured to: receive, from the at least one camera, at least one image frame previously provided to the single-stage object detector; and present the user interface to further include an indication of the position of the refuse can within the at least one image frame ([0010] positioning the refuse collection vehicle with respect to a refuse container to be emptied includes positioning the refuse collection vehicle in a fore-aft direction while observing images on a graphical display within the vehicle obtained from a camera directed at the refuse container to align a feature of an image of the refuse container on the graphical display with a visual marker positioned on the graphical display).
Regarding claim 16, please see the rejection above with regarding claim 8.
Regarding claim 11, Maroney teaches monitor subsequent movement of the refuse collection vehicle with respect to the trajectory; generate, based on the subsequent movement of the refuse collection vehicle, an updated version of the trajectory; and update the user interface to present the updated version of the trajectory (the vehicle position 102 and the position of the lift arm 104(1) and of the fork mechanism 104(2) are adjusted based on feedback received from one or more can detection sensors 106(2), 106(3). [0114] positioning the refuse collection vehicle 202 with respect to a refuse container 230 to be emptied includes positioning the vehicle 202 in a fore-aft direction while observing images on a graphical display 220 within the vehicle obtained from a camera directed at the container 230 to align a feature of an image of the container 230 on the graphical display 220 with a visual marker positioned on the graphical display 220. For example, as shown in FIG. 4, images of a refuse container 230 are captured by side view camera 234(1) and transmitted to graphical display 220 for display to the vehicle operator 150. In some implementations, a video feed of the refuse container 230 is provided by the side view camera 234(1) and transmitted real-time to graphical display 220 for display on the graphical display 220 to the vehicle operator 150).
Regarding claim 18, please see the rejection above with regarding claim 11.
Regarding claim 13, Maroney teaches wherein the controller is further configured to:
cause a heads-up-display (HUD) of the refuse collection vehicle to present the user interface ([0109] the display 120 is a heads-up display that projects images and/or video onto the windshield of the vehicle 102 for viewing by the operator).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 6-7, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over by Maroney (US20200247609 A1) in view of Sanchez (US 20260016310 A1)
Regarding claim 6, Maroney teaches detect, based on an output of the single-stage object detector, a second refuse can; determine a position of the second refuse can; update the user interface to include (i) a first graphical representation of the object (e.g. refuse can) and (ii) a second graphical representation of the second object ( e.g. refuse can).
Maroney does not explicitly teach but Sanchez teaches the limitation of receive, responsive to an interaction with the first graphical representation, a selection to accept the trajectory (Claim 1, transmitting a notification comprising the dynamic route and the potential benefit to a display or touchscreen of the autonomous vehicle; receiving, via the display screen or touchscreen, a selection input indicating acceptance or declination of the dynamic route; when the selection input indicates declination, modifying the route; and when the selection input indicates acceptance, instructing the autonomous vehicle to autonomously drive along the dynamic route).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, operating a refuse collection vehicle to collect refuse from a refuse container, as taught by Maroney, receiving, responsive to an interaction with the first graphical representation, a selection to accept the trajectory, as taught by Sanchez, as Maroney, Sanchez are directed to an object detection (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using responsive to an interaction with the first graphical representation, a selection to accept the trajectory and predictably applied it to update routes for improved efficiency.
Regarding claim 15 please see the rejection above with regarding claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, Maroney teaches present the user interface to include a graphical representation of the refuse can (Fig. 4A/B)., detect, via the user interface, a selection of the graphical representation of the object (refuse can).
Maroney does not explicitly teach but Sanchez teaches the limitation of update, responsive to detection of the selection of the graphical representation of the refuse can, the user interface to include an element to confirm selection of the refuse can; and receive, responsive to an interaction with the element, confirmation of the selection of the graphical representation (Sanchez claim 1 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, operating a refuse collection vehicle to collect refuse from a refuse container, as taught by Maroney, receiving, responsive to an interaction with the first graphical representation, a selection to accept the trajectory, as taught by as Maroney, Sanchez are directed to an object detection (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using responsive to an interaction with the first graphical representation, a selection to accept the trajectory and predictably applied it to update routes for improved efficiency.
Claims 9-10, 17 and 12 are ejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over by Maroney (US20200247609 A1) in view of Engle (US 2020/00086888 A1)
Regarding claim 9, Maroney does not explicitly teach but Engle teaches detect, based on an output of the single-stage object detector, a classification of the refuse can; and update, responsive to detection of the classification, the user interface to include an indication of the classification ([0024] 112 provides categorizations of recognized objects and path adjustments being considered. UI filtration expert system 140 filters according to those categorization to cause presentation of information that passenger 132 would consider as consequential and not what would be inconsequential).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, operating a refuse collection vehicle to collect refuse from a refuse container, as taught by Maroney, a classification of the object, e.g. a refuse can, as taught by Engle, as Maroney, Engle are directed to an object detection (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using classifying objects (e.g. trash can) and predictably applied it for simplifying information and make quick decisions.
Regarding claim 10, Maroney does not explicitly teach but Engle teaches detect wherein the one or more sides include a first side and a second side opposite the first side, and wherein the controller is further configured to: detect the presence of the refuse can on the first side;
detect a presence of a second refuse can on the second side; and present the user interface to include (i) a graphical representation of the refuse can and (ii) a graphical representation of the second refuse can (Fig. 2 and corresponding paragraphs show that vehicle detect objects on both side of the vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, operating a refuse collection vehicle to collect refuse from a refuse container, as taught by Maroney, detecting objects (e.g. trash can) on the both sides of the routes, as taught by Engle, as Maroney, Engle are directed to an object detection (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using detecting objects (e.g. trash can) on the both sides of the routes and predictably applied it for improved efficiency.
Regarding claim 17, please see the rejection above with regarding claim 10.
Regarding claim 12, Maroney does not explicitly teach but Engle teaches detect, based on second data collected by the sensor, a traversal of the refuse collection vehicle along the path; and update the user interface to reflect the traversal of the refuse collection vehicle along the path (Fig. 2 and corresponding paragraphs).
Engle teaches updating the user interface along the path. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, operating a refuse collection vehicle to collect refuse from a refuse container, as taught by Maroney, teaches updating the user interface along the path, as taught by Engle, as Maroney, Engle are directed to an object detection (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using updating the user interface along the path (known technology) and predictably applied it for displaying the traversal of the refuse collection vehicle along the path.
Prior Art
Please refer to form 892 for cited references.
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when responding to this action.
It is noted that any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275,277 (CCPA 1968)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JINGLI WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8040. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9 am-5 pm 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 Anne Antonucci can be reached on (313)446-6519. 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 571-272-100.
/J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights