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 .
This is in response to Applicant’s communication filed on 5/29/25, wherein:
Claims 1-32 are currently pending.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-19 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LYNCH ET AL (US 2026/0070221). Herein after LYNCH.
As for claim 1, LYNCH discloses a method, comprising: at a device: processing an input depicting performance of a robotic manipulation task, by a vision language model, to detect a failure of the robotic manipulation task and to generate a natural language explanation of the failure {see at least pars. 0007, 0009, 0223, 0226}; and outputting the explanation as feedback to a robotics application for use in improving a future performance of the robotic manipulation task {see at least pars. 0210, 0211}.
As for claim 2, LYNCH discloses wherein the input includes at least one image frame depicting the performance of the robotic manipulation task {see at least pars. 0009, 0011, 0013, 0015}.
As for claim 3, LYNCH discloses wherein the at least one image frame depicts performance of a sub-task of the robotic manipulation task {see at least pars. 0021, 0023}.
As for claim 4, LYNCH discloses wherein the input further includes a text prompt describing a language specification for generating the natural language explanation of the failure {see at least figures 20, 21, pars. 0226, 0227, 0228}.
As for claim 5, LYNCH discloses wherein the performance of the robotic manipulation task is a real-world performance of the robotic manipulation task by a robot {see at least pars. 0008, 0049, 0051, 0079, 0081}.
As for claim 6, LYNCH discloses wherein the performance of the robotic manipulation task is a simulated performance of the robotic manipulation task by a virtual robot {see at least pars. 0049, 0078, 0079, 0081, 0119, 0139}.
As for claim 7, LYNCH discloses wherein the robotic manipulation task is planned by the robotics application {see at least pars. 0221, 0223}.
As for claim 8, LYNCH discloses wherein the robotics application uses the feedback as a parameter of a reward function to compute a reward signal for reinforcement learning by the robotics application {see at least pars. 0211, 0214, 0217, 0222}.
As for claims 9, LYNCH discloses wherein the robotics application uses the feedback to refine task-plan generation for a task and motion planning function of the robotics application {see at least pars. 0092, 0095, 0101, 0111, 0135, 0136, 0161, 0163, 0169}.
As for claim 10, LYNCH discloses wherein the robotics application uses the feedback to verify success of one or more sub-tasks of the robotic manipulation task {see at least pars. 0092, 0095, 0101, 0111, 0135, 0136, 0161, 0163, 0169}.
As for claim 11, LYNCH discloses wherein the vision language model is integrated with the robotics application {see at least pars. 0007, 0141, 0142, 0144}.
As for claims 12-19 and 32, the limitations of these claims have been noted in the rejection above. They are therefore considered rejected for the same reason set forth above.
Claims 20-31 are allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rose et al (US 2024/0253211): Robot and system method control modules and computer program products that leverage large language models.
Banerjee et al (US 2024/0402725): Method and System for task feasibility analysis with explanation for robotic task execution.
Burns et al (US 2026/0054382): Methods, system, and apparatus including computer programs encoded on computer storage media, for automatically generating code for contact rich manipulation tasks by providing action space constraints to a large language model.
Khansari Zadeh et al (US 2025/0153363): raining and refining robotic control policies using imitation learning techniques. A robotic control policy can be initially trained based on human demonstrations of various robotic tasks.
Rivera et al (US 2026/0048505): Robotic task completion from natural language requests.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kira Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-1614. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 9:00-5:00 ET.
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, Khoi Tran can be reached on 571-272-6919. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/KIRA NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights