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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 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.
In Reference to Claims 1-20
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
In Claim 1, in lines 2-5 recites “obtaining, through the sensor of the movable device, first coordinate of each obstacle in a map coordinate system; converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in a coordinate system of the movable device” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since “a map coordinate system” is being updated by the sensor of the “movable device” however the coordinate of this is converted to a coordinate system of the movable device in which is different from the map coordinate system. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the language is interpreted as coordinate system of the movable device can be part of map coordinate system.
In Claim 1, in lines 6-7 recites “calculating a distance between the second coordinate of the obstacle and an origin of the coordinate system of the movable device, and an angle of the obstacle” however it is not clear as to what “origin of the coordinate system of the movable device” is intending to describe and further what is intending to describe by the “an angle of the obstacle” since the claim do not further recite as to what this angle is and how the angle is formed. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the language is “origin of the coordinate system of the movable device” is interpreted as center of the machine and angle can be any angle being formed.
In Claim 1, in lines 10-11 recites “to trigger a virtual collision of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the first angle interval” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since first the recitation is not part of a step but merely a functional language (which is capable of performing) and second it is not clear as what is required by the “virtual collision” is such as is it being done in a real world or just in the virtual world like in the mind. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art the recitations are merely reciting a function that is capable of being performed.
In Claim 1, in lines 15-17 recites “to trigger a virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the second angle interval” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since first the recitation is not part of a step but merely a functional language (which is capable of performing) and second it is not clear as what is required by the “virtual collision” is such as is it being done in a real world or just in the virtual world like in the mind. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art the recitations are merely reciting a function that is capable of being performed.
In Claim 5 lines 1-7 recites “wherein trigger the virtual collision of the movable device comprises: controlling the robot to stop moving; calculating a rotational direction and a rotational angle based on the second coordinate of the obstacle and a movement direction of the movable device; and moving the movable device according to the rotational direction and the rotational angle” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since “trigger” in line 1 refers back to in claim 1 as “to trigger” which is merely intended function and not a positive step however the claim recitations in lines 3-7 are recited as multiple positive steps therefore it is not clear if the positive steps being recited are required or not since the steps are further defining a function of “to trigger” and not a step such as triggering. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the steps are treated as functions.
In Claim 6 lines 1-13 recites “The method of claim 1, wherein trigger the virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device comprises: obtaining initial speeds of a left wheel and a right wheel of the movable device; calculating an output value of a PID controller of the movable device based on the distance, and a turning speed and an expected obstacle avoidance path of the movable device; determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a right side of the movable device; and determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a left side of the movable device” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since “trigger” in line 1 refers back to in claim 1 as “to trigger” which is merely intended function and not a positive step however the claim recitations in lines 3-13 are recited as multiple positive steps therefore it is not clear if the positive steps being recited are required or not since the steps are further defining a function of “to trigger” and not a step such as triggering. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the steps are treated as functions.
In Claim 8, in lines 8-9 recites “instruction for obtaining, through the sensor of the movable device, first coordinate of each obstacle in a map coordinate system; converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in a coordinate system of the movable device” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since “a map coordinate system” is being updated by the sensor of the “movable device” however the coordinate of this is converted to a coordinate system of the movable device in which is different from the map coordinate system. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the language is interpreted as coordinate system of the movable device can be part of map coordinate system.
In Claim 8, in lines 12-13 recites “instructions for calculating a distance between the second coordinate of the obstacle and an origin of the coordinate system of the movable device, and an angle of the obstacle” however it is not clear as to what “origin of the coordinate system of the movable device” is intending to describe and further what is intending to describe by the “an angle of the obstacle” since the claim do not further recite as to what this angle is and how the angle is formed. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the language is “origin of the coordinate system of the movable device” is interpreted as center of the machine and angle can be any angle being formed.
In Claim 8, in lines 16-18 recites “to trigger a virtual collision of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the first angle interval” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since first the recitation is not part of a step but merely a functional language (which is capable of performing) and second it is not clear as what is required by the “virtual collision” is such as is it being done in a real world or just in the virtual world like in the mind. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art the recitations are merely reciting a function that is capable of being performed.
In Claim 8, in lines 21-23 recites “to trigger a virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the second angle interval” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since first the recitation is not part of a step but merely a functional language (which is capable of performing) and second it is not clear as what is required by the “virtual collision” is such as is it being done in a real world or just in the virtual world like in the mind. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art the recitations are merely reciting a function that is capable of being performed.
In Claim 12 lines 1-7 recites “wherein trigger the virtual collision of the movable device comprises: controlling the robot to stop moving; calculating a rotational direction and a rotational angle based on the second coordinate of the obstacle and a movement direction of the movable device; and moving the movable device according to the rotational direction and the rotational angle” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since “trigger” in line 1 refers back to in claim 1 as “to trigger” which is merely intended function and not a positive step however the claim recitations in lines 3-7 are recited as multiple positive steps therefore it is not clear if the positive steps being recited are required or not since the steps are further defining a function of “to trigger” and not a step such as triggering. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the steps are treated as functions.
In Claim 13 lines 1-13 recites “wherein trigger the virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device comprises: obtaining initial speeds of a left wheel and a right wheel of the movable device; calculating an output value of a PID controller of the movable device based on the distance, and a turning speed and an expected obstacle avoidance path of the movable device; determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a right side of the movable device; and determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a left side of the movable device” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since “trigger” in line 1 refers back to in claim 1 as “to trigger” which is merely intended function and not a positive step however the claim recitations in lines 3-13 are recited as multiple positive steps therefore it is not clear if the positive steps being recited are required or not since the steps are further defining a function of “to trigger” and not a step such as triggering. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the steps are treated as functions.
In Claim 15, in lines 3-4 recites “instruction for obtaining, through the sensor of the movable device, first coordinate of each obstacle in a map coordinate system; converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in a coordinate system of the movable device” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since “a map coordinate system” is being updated by the sensor of the “movable device” however the coordinate of this is converted to a coordinate system of the movable device in which is different from the map coordinate system. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the language is interpreted as coordinate system of the movable device can be part of map coordinate system.
In Claim 15, in lines 7-8 recites “instruction for calculating a distance between the second coordinate of the obstacle and an origin of the coordinate system of the movable device, and an angle of the obstacle” however it is not clear as to what “origin of the coordinate system of the movable device” is intending to describe and further what is intending to describe by the “an angle of the obstacle” since the claim do not further recite as to what this angle is and how the angle is formed. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the language is “origin of the coordinate system of the movable device” is interpreted as center of the machine and angle can be any angle being formed.
In Claim 15, in lines 11-13 recites “to trigger a virtual collision of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the first angle interval” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since first the recitation is not part of a step but merely a functional language (which is capable of performing) and second it is not clear as what is required by the “virtual collision” is such as is it being done in a real world or just in the virtual world like in the mind. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art the recitations are merely reciting a function that is capable of being performed.
In Claim 15, in lines 16-18 recites “to trigger a virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the second angle interval” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since first the recitation is not part of a step but merely a functional language (which is capable of performing) and second it is not clear as what is required by the “virtual collision” is such as is it being done in a real world or just in the virtual world like in the mind. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art the recitations are merely reciting a function that is capable of being performed.
In Claim 19 lines 1-7 recites “wherein trigger the virtual collision of the movable device comprises: controlling the robot to stop moving; calculating a rotational direction and a rotational angle based on the second coordinate of the obstacle and a movement direction of the movable device; and moving the movable device according to the rotational direction and the rotational angle” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since “trigger” in line 1 refers back to in claim 1 as “to trigger” which is merely intended function and not a positive step however the claim recitations in lines 3-7 are recited as multiple positive steps therefore it is not clear if the positive steps being recited are required or not since the steps are further defining a function of “to trigger” and not a step such as triggering. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the steps are treated as functions.
In Claim 20 lines 1-13 recites “The method of claim 1, wherein trigger the virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device comprises: obtaining initial speeds of a left wheel and a right wheel of the movable device; calculating an output value of a PID controller of the movable device based on the distance, and a turning speed and an expected obstacle avoidance path of the movable device; determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a right side of the movable device; and determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a left side of the movable device” however it is not clear as to what is required by the claim since “trigger” in line 1 refers back to in claim 1 as “to trigger” which is merely intended function and not a positive step however the claim recitations in lines 3-13 are recited as multiple positive steps therefore it is not clear if the positive steps being recited are required or not since the steps are further defining a function of “to trigger” and not a step such as triggering. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the steps are treated as functions.
The following errors explicitly found in Claims 1, 5-6, 8, 12-13, 15 and 19-20 are given way of examples only and not inclusive of all errors. Applicant should carefully review and amend all the claims to ensure all errors are corrected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3-8, 10-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
[101 Analysis Step 1]
Step 1, of the 2019 Guidance, first looks to whether the claimed invention is directed to a statutory category, namely a process, machine, manufactures, and compositions of mater.
The claim 1 is directed to an obstacle avoidance method for a movable device having at least a sensor (i.e. process), claim 8 is directed to a movable device (i.e. machine) and claim 15 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing one or more computer programs (i.e. machine). Thus, claims 1, 8 and 15 are one of four the statutory categories (Step 1: YES).
[101 Analysis Step 2A, Prong I]
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent Claim 1 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below) and will be used as a representative claim(s) for the remainder of the 101 rejection. Claim 1 recites:
An obstacle avoidance method for a movable device having at least a sensor, comprising:
obtaining, through the sensor of the movable device, first coordinate of each obstacle in a map coordinate system;
converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in a coordinate system of the movable device;
calculating a distance between the second coordinate of the obstacle and an origin of the coordinate system of the movable device, and an angle of the obstacle;
determining whether the distance is less than or equal to a first detection radius, and determining whether the angle of the obstacle is in a first angle interval in response to the distance being less than or equal to the first detection radius to trigger a virtual collision of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the first angle interval; and
determining whether the distance being larger than or equal to a second detection radius in response to the virtual collision being not triggered, and determining whether the angle of the obstacle is in a second angle interval to trigger a virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the second angle interval.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitations(s) constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretations, the claim covers performance of the limitation in the human mind. For example, “converting…”, “calculating…”, “determining…” and “determining…” in the context of the claim encompasses a person looking at and using the data collected to formulating a judgement and calculation. Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
[101 Analysis Step 2A, Prong II]
Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, the additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
An obstacle avoidance method for a movable device having at least a sensor, comprising:
obtaining, through the sensor of the movable device, first coordinate of each obstacle in a map coordinate system;
converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in a coordinate system of the movable device;
calculating a distance between the second coordinate of the obstacle and an origin of the coordinate system of the movable device, and an angle of the obstacle;
determining whether the distance is less than or equal to a first detection radius, and determining whether the angle of the obstacle is in a first angle interval in response to the distance being less than or equal to the first detection radius to trigger a virtual collision of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the first angle interval; and
determining whether the distance being larger than or equal to a second detection radius in response to the virtual collision being not triggered, and determining whether the angle of the obstacle is in a second angle interval to trigger a virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the second angle interval.
For the following reason(s), the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract into a practical applications.
Regarding the additional limitations of “obtaining…” the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities that merely use a computer (processing circuitry of a computer system) and sensor to perform the process. In particular, the obtaining step can be performed via sensors are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general means of gathering obstacle data for use in the converting and calculating steps), and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Lastly, the “movable device” and “sensor” are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e. as a generic processor performing a generic computer function; general sensor function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and normal moving device functions.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical filed, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05). Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
[101 Analysis Step 2B]
Regarding Step 2B of the Revised Guidance, representative independent claims 1, 8 and 15 do not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of using a sensor and moving data to and using the data to perform the steps of converting…, calculating…, determining…, determining… amounts to nothing more than steps being performed in the mind. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. And as discussed above, the additional limitations of “obtaining…” the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities. Hence, the claims are not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 3-7, 10-14 and 17-20 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claims to be directed towards statutory subject matter. The claims merely recite: abstract idea. Each of the further limitations expound upon the abstract ideas and do not recite additional elements integrating the abstract ideas into a practical application or additional elements that are not well-understood, routine or conventional. Therefore, dependent claims 3-7, 10-14 and 17-20 are similarly rejected as being directed towards non-statutory subject matter.
Therefore, claims 1, 3-8, 10-15 and 17-20 is/are ineligible under 35 USC §101.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-6, 8-9, 12-13, 15-16 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pub No. CN 118319194 A to Chen et. al. (Chen).
Examiner’s Note: Machine Translation of CN 118319194 A will be used in the rejection below.
In Reference to Claim 1
An obstacle avoidance method for a movable device having at least a sensor, comprising:
obtaining, through the sensor of the movable device, first coordinate of each obstacle in a map coordinate system (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 4 paragraph 5 “in the step S1, the D-type robot can determine the position of the obstacle in front through the line laser sensor installed on the front side, specifically can obtain the distance information between the obstacle outline point P closest to the machine body centre O1, as the distance information between the obstacle detected in front and the D-type robot. Preferably, the D-type robot acquires the point cloud data of the obstacle in front through the line laser sensor, such as the coordinate data of each discrete point near the front end of the D-type robot in the obstacle #1 of FIG. 1, including the left-most outline point P scanned in the obstacle #1. In some embodiments, the point cloud data can be linearly fitted using a least square method to obtain a straight line or curve capable of representing the position of the front obstacle shown in FIG. 2, then it can be distinguished in a certain length threshold range whether the front obstacle is a linear obstacle or a non-linear obstacle (an obstacle surrounded by a curved contour line), for example, the length of the straight line processed by fitting is greater than a certain length threshold, determining that the collected point cloud data is from a linear obstacle, that is, the obstacle in front is a linear obstacle, belonging to a long straight obstacle, a straight wall, a box, a threshold and so on; if the length of the straight line processed by fitting is less than a certain length threshold value, determining that the collected point cloud data is not from the linear obstacle, that is, the obstacle in front is not the linear obstacle, and the point cloud data is classified into the non-linear obstacle, and the point cloud data also belongs to the obstacle in irregular shape. In some embodiments, even if a straight line of a front obstacle cannot be fitted, such as an irregular shape of the front obstacle, a contour point closest to the front end of the D-type robot can be extracted as an alignment point in the front obstacle, i.e., a reference point for aligning the obstacle and bypassing the obstacle”);
converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in a coordinate system of the movable device; calculating a distance between the second coordinate of the obstacle and an origin of the coordinate system of the movable device, and an angle of the obstacle (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 11 paragraph 2 “It should be added that, in combination with Figures 4 and 5, it can be seen that after the D-type robot is aligned with the obstacle, the D-type robot uses the point cloud data corresponding to the line laser sensor set on the side of the obstacle by its head to determine the position of the obstacle and bypass the obstacle in the subsequent walking process, wherein the point cloud data collected by the line laser sensor set at the position M2 of the head 1 is a discrete point reflected on the lower side contour line of the obstacle #, each discrete point can be converted to the map coordinate system, if the origin of the map coordinate system is selected as the body center O1, then the linear distance between the corresponding discrete point and the body center O1 is calculated using the converted coordinates of each discrete point in the map coordinate system, which is reflected as the distance between the contour line of one side of the obstacle and the side of the D-type robot; at the same time, the D-type robot The person uses the line laser sensor (the line laser sensor installed at position M1) provided at the front end of the machine head 1 to scan the environmental information on the blind spot side of the alignment point P of the obstacle #1, that is, the left area of the alignment point P of the obstacle #1 (which has not been detected before the rotation), and fills the blind spot on the left side, so as to avoid other obstacles on the blind spot side of the alignment point of the obstacle. In this way, the obstacles that may appear in the left area of the alignment point P can be dealt with according to the aforementioned steps S1 to S3, thereby achieving the effect of bypassing the obstacles in real time; therefore, in the process of bypassing the obstacles, the D-type robot is not limited by the detection blind spot formed by the obstacles relative to the D-type robot, so that the D-type sweeping robot is not easy to collide with the obstacles in front during the turning process”);
determining whether the distance is less than or equal to a first detection radius, and determining whether the angle of the obstacle is in a first angle interval in response to the distance being less than or equal to the first detection radius to trigger a virtual collision of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the first angle interval; and determining whether the distance being larger than or equal to a second detection radius in response to the virtual collision being not triggered, and determining whether the angle of the obstacle is in a second angle interval to trigger a virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the second angle interval (Chen teaches to calculate the anti-collision distance which includes radius and angles from the moving device to the obstacle and to move the moving device based on the anti-collision distance therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the anti-collision distance will be determined to be above the threshold and below the threshold in order to avoid the collision with the obstacle) (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1 “Furthermore, before the D-type robot adjusts its posture, the distance between the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles in front is set to be equal to the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance; within the detection range of the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose, when the angle formed by the line connecting the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis of the D-type robot increases within the acute angle range, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance increases; within the detection range of the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose, when the angle formed by the line connecting the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis of the D-type robot decreases within the acute angle range, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance decreases”, “Furthermore, the angle formed by the line between the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles relative to the central axis of the D-type robot is set as the alignment point detection angle; the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance is set to be equal to: the sum of the ratio of the vertical distance between the center of the fuselage and the front boundary line of the nose to the cosine value of the alignment point detection angle and the preset spacing; wherein the central axis of the D-type robot is set to be parallel to the forward direction of the D-type robot. Furthermore, when the distance between the body center of the D-type robot and the alignment point among the obstacle reaches a preset anti-collision distance, the line between the body center of the D-type robot and the alignment point among the obstacle is marked as a first target line segment, and the line between the body center of the D-type robot and the vertex on one side of the nose of the D-type robot is marked as a second target line segment; during the rotation process of the D-type robot, the required rotation angle is an angle equal to the angle formed by the first target line segment and the second target line segment” and “semicircular body 2. Because the body 2 is a circular structure with two sides cut, the body center O1 of the D-type robot is the center of the body 2 before cutting; the vertex on one side of the head of the D-type robot is the vertex on the side in front of the rectangular head 1. In some embodiments, the midpoint of the axle can be set as the center of the body 2, then the straight-line distance between the vertex A on the right side of the head of the D-type robot shown in the figure and the body center O1 of the D-type robot becomes the maximum radius of the D-type robot, which is also equivalent to the longest distance from the midpoint of the axle (regarded as the body center O1) to the boundary of the head 1 of the D-type robot; if the head 1 and the body 2 of the D-type robot are combined into one, the maximum radius of the D-type robot is equivalent to the longest distance from the midpoint of the axle to the boundary of the robot head 1; wherein, the front of the rectangular head 1 points to the forward direction of the D-type robot, that is, the direction of the arrow shown in the figure. As shown in FIG2 , the diameter of the semicircular body 2 is equal to the side length of the contour line of the rectangular head 1 parallel to the wheel axle, wherein the radius of the semicircular body 2 is represented by the distance between the body center O1 of the D-type robot and the side position B of the head 1 of the D-type robot (which can be attributed to the right side position B of the head 1), which is equivalent to half of the body width or half of the head width; the side of the rectangular head 1 is perpendicular to the wheel axle; as shown in FIG2 , the straight-line distance between the body center O1 of the D-type robot and the center position C of the bottom edge of the body 2 of the D-type robot is represented as the maximum radius of the body 2 of the D-type robot, and the maximum radius of the body 2 of the D-type robot is set to be greater than half of the body width or half of the head width. Preferably, half of the body width is set to 156.25 mm, and the maximum radius of the body 2 of the D-type robot is set to 163.5 mm”).
In Reference to Claim 2
The method of claim 1 (see rejection to claim 1 above), further comprising:
controlling the movable device to move at a normal speed in response to the distance being larger than the first detection radius and less than the second detection radius; controlling movable device to move at the normal speed in response to the distance being larger than the first detection radius and the angle of the obstacle being not in the second angle interval; controlling the movable device to move at the normal speed in response to the angle of the obstacle being not in the first angle interval and the distance being less than the second detection radius; and controlling the movable device to move at the normal speed in response to the angle of the obstacle being not in the first angle interval and not in the second angle interval (since Chen does not specify the speed of the moving device when performing the avoiding operated therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that Chen would operate the avoiding operations with normal speeds) (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1).
In Reference to Claim 5
The method of claim 1 (see rejection to claim 1 above), wherein trigger the virtual collision of the movable device comprises:
controlling the robot to stop moving; calculating a rotational direction and a rotational angle based on the second coordinate of the obstacle and a movement direction of the movable device; and moving the movable device according to the rotational direction and the rotational angle (system of Chen is capable of performing such functions above) (see at least Yoon Figs. 1-22 and paragraphs 4, 17, 74, 169).
In Reference to Claim 6
The method of claim 1 (see rejection to claim 1 above), wherein trigger the virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device comprises:
obtaining initial speeds of a left wheel and a right wheel of the movable device; calculating an output value of a PID controller of the movable device based on the distance, and a turning speed and an expected obstacle avoidance path of the movable device; determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a right side of the movable device; and determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a left side of the movable device (system of Chen is capable of performing such functions above) (see at least Yoon Figs. 1-22 and paragraphs 4, 17, 74, 169).
In Reference to Claim 8
A movable device, comprising:
at least a sensor (M1, M2);
a processor (computer);
a memory (memory) coupled to the processor (computer); and
one or more computer programs stored in the memory and executable on the processor (computer);
wherein, the one or more computer programs comprise:
instructions for obtaining, through the sensor of the movable device, first coordinate of each obstacle in a map coordinate system (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 4 paragraph 5 “in the step S1, the D-type robot can determine the position of the obstacle in front through the line laser sensor installed on the front side, specifically can obtain the distance information between the obstacle outline point P closest to the machine body centre O1, as the distance information between the obstacle detected in front and the D-type robot. Preferably, the D-type robot acquires the point cloud data of the obstacle in front through the line laser sensor, such as the coordinate data of each discrete point near the front end of the D-type robot in the obstacle #1 of FIG. 1, including the left-most outline point P scanned in the obstacle #1. In some embodiments, the point cloud data can be linearly fitted using a least square method to obtain a straight line or curve capable of representing the position of the front obstacle shown in FIG. 2, then it can be distinguished in a certain length threshold range whether the front obstacle is a linear obstacle or a non-linear obstacle (an obstacle surrounded by a curved contour line), for example, the length of the straight line processed by fitting is greater than a certain length threshold, determining that the collected point cloud data is from a linear obstacle, that is, the obstacle in front is a linear obstacle, belonging to a long straight obstacle, a straight wall, a box, a threshold and so on; if the length of the straight line processed by fitting is less than a certain length threshold value, determining that the collected point cloud data is not from the linear obstacle, that is, the obstacle in front is not the linear obstacle, and the point cloud data is classified into the non-linear obstacle, and the point cloud data also belongs to the obstacle in irregular shape. In some embodiments, even if a straight line of a front obstacle cannot be fitted, such as an irregular shape of the front obstacle, a contour point closest to the front end of the D-type robot can be extracted as an alignment point in the front obstacle, i.e., a reference point for aligning the obstacle and bypassing the obstacle”);
instructions for converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in a coordinate system of the movable device; instructions for calculating a distance between the second coordinate of the obstacle and an origin of the coordinate system of the movable device, and an angle of the obstacle (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 11 paragraph 2 “It should be added that, in combination with Figures 4 and 5, it can be seen that after the D-type robot is aligned with the obstacle, the D-type robot uses the point cloud data corresponding to the line laser sensor set on the side of the obstacle by its head to determine the position of the obstacle and bypass the obstacle in the subsequent walking process, wherein the point cloud data collected by the line laser sensor set at the position M2 of the head 1 is a discrete point reflected on the lower side contour line of the obstacle #, each discrete point can be converted to the map coordinate system, if the origin of the map coordinate system is selected as the body center O1, then the linear distance between the corresponding discrete point and the body center O1 is calculated using the converted coordinates of each discrete point in the map coordinate system, which is reflected as the distance between the contour line of one side of the obstacle and the side of the D-type robot; at the same time, the D-type robot The person uses the line laser sensor (the line laser sensor installed at position M1) provided at the front end of the machine head 1 to scan the environmental information on the blind spot side of the alignment point P of the obstacle #1, that is, the left area of the alignment point P of the obstacle #1 (which has not been detected before the rotation), and fills the blind spot on the left side, so as to avoid other obstacles on the blind spot side of the alignment point of the obstacle. In this way, the obstacles that may appear in the left area of the alignment point P can be dealt with according to the aforementioned steps S1 to S3, thereby achieving the effect of bypassing the obstacles in real time; therefore, in the process of bypassing the obstacles, the D-type robot is not limited by the detection blind spot formed by the obstacles relative to the D-type robot, so that the D-type sweeping robot is not easy to collide with the obstacles in front during the turning process”);
instructions for determining whether the distance is less than or equal to a first detection radius, and determining whether the angle of the obstacle is in a first angle interval in response to the distance being less than or equal to the first detection radius to trigger a virtual collision of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the first angle interval; and instructions for determining whether the distance being larger than or equal to a second detection radius in response to the virtual collision being not triggered, and determining whether the angle of the obstacle is in a second angle interval to trigger a virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the second angle interval (Chen teaches to calculate the anti-collision distance which includes radius and angles from the moving device to the obstacle and to move the moving device based on the anti-collision distance therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the anti-collision distance will be determined to be above the threshold and below the threshold in order to avoid the collision with the obstacle) (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1 “Furthermore, before the D-type robot adjusts its posture, the distance between the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles in front is set to be equal to the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance; within the detection range of the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose, when the angle formed by the line connecting the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis of the D-type robot increases within the acute angle range, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance increases; within the detection range of the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose, when the angle formed by the line connecting the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis of the D-type robot decreases within the acute angle range, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance decreases”, “Furthermore, the angle formed by the line between the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles relative to the central axis of the D-type robot is set as the alignment point detection angle; the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance is set to be equal to: the sum of the ratio of the vertical distance between the center of the fuselage and the front boundary line of the nose to the cosine value of the alignment point detection angle and the preset spacing; wherein the central axis of the D-type robot is set to be parallel to the forward direction of the D-type robot. Furthermore, when the distance between the body center of the D-type robot and the alignment point among the obstacle reaches a preset anti-collision distance, the line between the body center of the D-type robot and the alignment point among the obstacle is marked as a first target line segment, and the line between the body center of the D-type robot and the vertex on one side of the nose of the D-type robot is marked as a second target line segment; during the rotation process of the D-type robot, the required rotation angle is an angle equal to the angle formed by the first target line segment and the second target line segment” and “semicircular body 2. Because the body 2 is a circular structure with two sides cut, the body center O1 of the D-type robot is the center of the body 2 before cutting; the vertex on one side of the head of the D-type robot is the vertex on the side in front of the rectangular head 1. In some embodiments, the midpoint of the axle can be set as the center of the body 2, then the straight-line distance between the vertex A on the right side of the head of the D-type robot shown in the figure and the body center O1 of the D-type robot becomes the maximum radius of the D-type robot, which is also equivalent to the longest distance from the midpoint of the axle (regarded as the body center O1) to the boundary of the head 1 of the D-type robot; if the head 1 and the body 2 of the D-type robot are combined into one, the maximum radius of the D-type robot is equivalent to the longest distance from the midpoint of the axle to the boundary of the robot head 1; wherein, the front of the rectangular head 1 points to the forward direction of the D-type robot, that is, the direction of the arrow shown in the figure. As shown in FIG2 , the diameter of the semicircular body 2 is equal to the side length of the contour line of the rectangular head 1 parallel to the wheel axle, wherein the radius of the semicircular body 2 is represented by the distance between the body center O1 of the D-type robot and the side position B of the head 1 of the D-type robot (which can be attributed to the right side position B of the head 1), which is equivalent to half of the body width or half of the head width; the side of the rectangular head 1 is perpendicular to the wheel axle; as shown in FIG2 , the straight-line distance between the body center O1 of the D-type robot and the center position C of the bottom edge of the body 2 of the D-type robot is represented as the maximum radius of the body 2 of the D-type robot, and the maximum radius of the body 2 of the D-type robot is set to be greater than half of the body width or half of the head width. Preferably, half of the body width is set to 156.25 mm, and the maximum radius of the body 2 of the D-type robot is set to 163.5 mm”).
In Reference to Claim 9
The movable device of claim 8 (see rejection to claim 8 above), wherein the one or more computer programs further comprises:
instructions for controlling the movable device to move at a normal speed in response to the distance being larger than the first detection radius and less than the second detection radius; instructions for controlling movable device to move at the normal speed in response to the distance being larger than the first detection radius and the angle of the obstacle being not in the second angle interval; instructions for controlling the movable device to move at the normal speed in response to the angle of the obstacle being not in the first angle interval and the distance being less than the second detection radius; and controlling the movable device to move at the normal speed in response to the angle of the obstacle being not in the first angle interval and not in the second angle interval (since Chen does not specify the speed of the moving device when performing the avoiding operated therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that Chen would operate the avoiding operations with normal speeds) (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1).
In Reference to Claim 12
The movable device of claim 8 (see rejection to claim 8 above), wherein trigger the virtual collision of the movable device comprises: controlling the robot to stop moving; calculating a rotational direction and a rotational angle based on the second coordinate of the obstacle and a movement direction of the movable device; and moving the movable device according to the rotational direction and the rotational angle (system of Chen is capable of performing such functions above) (see at least Yoon Figs. 1-22 and paragraphs 4, 17, 74, 169).
In Reference to Claim 13
The movable device of claim 8 (see rejection to claim 8 above), wherein trigger the virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device comprises: obtaining initial speeds of a left wheel and a right wheel of the movable device; calculating an output value of a PID controller of the movable device based on the distance, and a turning speed and an expected obstacle avoidance path of the movable device; determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a right side of the movable device; and determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a left side of the movable device (system of Chen is capable of performing such functions above) (see at least Yoon Figs. 1-22 and paragraphs 4, 17, 74, 169).
In Reference to Claim 15
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing one or more computer programs, wherein the one or more computer programs comprise:
instructions for obtaining, through the sensor of the movable device, first coordinate of each obstacle in a map coordinate system (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 4 paragraph 5 “in the step S1, the D-type robot can determine the position of the obstacle in front through the line laser sensor installed on the front side, specifically can obtain the distance information between the obstacle outline point P closest to the machine body centre O1, as the distance information between the obstacle detected in front and the D-type robot. Preferably, the D-type robot acquires the point cloud data of the obstacle in front through the line laser sensor, such as the coordinate data of each discrete point near the front end of the D-type robot in the obstacle #1 of FIG. 1, including the left-most outline point P scanned in the obstacle #1. In some embodiments, the point cloud data can be linearly fitted using a least square method to obtain a straight line or curve capable of representing the position of the front obstacle shown in FIG. 2, then it can be distinguished in a certain length threshold range whether the front obstacle is a linear obstacle or a non-linear obstacle (an obstacle surrounded by a curved contour line), for example, the length of the straight line processed by fitting is greater than a certain length threshold, determining that the collected point cloud data is from a linear obstacle, that is, the obstacle in front is a linear obstacle, belonging to a long straight obstacle, a straight wall, a box, a threshold and so on; if the length of the straight line processed by fitting is less than a certain length threshold value, determining that the collected point cloud data is not from the linear obstacle, that is, the obstacle in front is not the linear obstacle, and the point cloud data is classified into the non-linear obstacle, and the point cloud data also belongs to the obstacle in irregular shape. In some embodiments, even if a straight line of a front obstacle cannot be fitted, such as an irregular shape of the front obstacle, a contour point closest to the front end of the D-type robot can be extracted as an alignment point in the front obstacle, i.e., a reference point for aligning the obstacle and bypassing the obstacle”);
instructions for converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in a coordinate system of the movable device; instructions for calculating a distance between the second coordinate of the obstacle and an origin of the coordinate system of the movable device, and an angle of the obstacle (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 11 paragraph 2 “It should be added that, in combination with Figures 4 and 5, it can be seen that after the D-type robot is aligned with the obstacle, the D-type robot uses the point cloud data corresponding to the line laser sensor set on the side of the obstacle by its head to determine the position of the obstacle and bypass the obstacle in the subsequent walking process, wherein the point cloud data collected by the line laser sensor set at the position M2 of the head 1 is a discrete point reflected on the lower side contour line of the obstacle #, each discrete point can be converted to the map coordinate system, if the origin of the map coordinate system is selected as the body center O1, then the linear distance between the corresponding discrete point and the body center O1 is calculated using the converted coordinates of each discrete point in the map coordinate system, which is reflected as the distance between the contour line of one side of the obstacle and the side of the D-type robot; at the same time, the D-type robot The person uses the line laser sensor (the line laser sensor installed at position M1) provided at the front end of the machine head 1 to scan the environmental information on the blind spot side of the alignment point P of the obstacle #1, that is, the left area of the alignment point P of the obstacle #1 (which has not been detected before the rotation), and fills the blind spot on the left side, so as to avoid other obstacles on the blind spot side of the alignment point of the obstacle. In this way, the obstacles that may appear in the left area of the alignment point P can be dealt with according to the aforementioned steps S1 to S3, thereby achieving the effect of bypassing the obstacles in real time; therefore, in the process of bypassing the obstacles, the D-type robot is not limited by the detection blind spot formed by the obstacles relative to the D-type robot, so that the D-type sweeping robot is not easy to collide with the obstacles in front during the turning process”);
instructions for determining whether the distance is less than or equal to a first detection radius, and determining whether the angle of the obstacle is in a first angle interval in response to the distance being less than or equal to the first detection radius to trigger a virtual collision of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the first angle interval; and instructions for determining whether the distance being larger than or equal to a second detection radius in response to the virtual collision being not triggered, and determining whether the angle of the obstacle is in a second angle interval to trigger a virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device in response to the angle of the obstacle being in the second angle interval (Chen teaches to calculate the anti-collision distance which includes radius and angles from the moving device to the obstacle and to move the moving device based on the anti-collision distance therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the anti-collision distance will be determined to be above the threshold and below the threshold in order to avoid the collision with the obstacle) (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1 “Furthermore, before the D-type robot adjusts its posture, the distance between the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles in front is set to be equal to the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance; within the detection range of the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose, when the angle formed by the line connecting the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis of the D-type robot increases within the acute angle range, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance increases; within the detection range of the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose, when the angle formed by the line connecting the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis of the D-type robot decreases within the acute angle range, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance decreases”, “Furthermore, the angle formed by the line between the center of the fuselage and the alignment point among the obstacles relative to the central axis of the D-type robot is set as the alignment point detection angle; the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance is set to be equal to: the sum of the ratio of the vertical distance between the center of the fuselage and the front boundary line of the nose to the cosine value of the alignment point detection angle and the preset spacing; wherein the central axis of the D-type robot is set to be parallel to the forward direction of the D-type robot. Furthermore, when the distance between the body center of the D-type robot and the alignment point among the obstacle reaches a preset anti-collision distance, the line between the body center of the D-type robot and the alignment point among the obstacle is marked as a first target line segment, and the line between the body center of the D-type robot and the vertex on one side of the nose of the D-type robot is marked as a second target line segment; during the rotation process of the D-type robot, the required rotation angle is an angle equal to the angle formed by the first target line segment and the second target line segment” and “semicircular body 2. Because the body 2 is a circular structure with two sides cut, the body center O1 of the D-type robot is the center of the body 2 before cutting; the vertex on one side of the head of the D-type robot is the vertex on the side in front of the rectangular head 1. In some embodiments, the midpoint of the axle can be set as the center of the body 2, then the straight-line distance between the vertex A on the right side of the head of the D-type robot shown in the figure and the body center O1 of the D-type robot becomes the maximum radius of the D-type robot, which is also equivalent to the longest distance from the midpoint of the axle (regarded as the body center O1) to the boundary of the head 1 of the D-type robot; if the head 1 and the body 2 of the D-type robot are combined into one, the maximum radius of the D-type robot is equivalent to the longest distance from the midpoint of the axle to the boundary of the robot head 1; wherein, the front of the rectangular head 1 points to the forward direction of the D-type robot, that is, the direction of the arrow shown in the figure. As shown in FIG2 , the diameter of the semicircular body 2 is equal to the side length of the contour line of the rectangular head 1 parallel to the wheel axle, wherein the radius of the semicircular body 2 is represented by the distance between the body center O1 of the D-type robot and the side position B of the head 1 of the D-type robot (which can be attributed to the right side position B of the head 1), which is equivalent to half of the body width or half of the head width; the side of the rectangular head 1 is perpendicular to the wheel axle; as shown in FIG2 , the straight-line distance between the body center O1 of the D-type robot and the center position C of the bottom edge of the body 2 of the D-type robot is represented as the maximum radius of the body 2 of the D-type robot, and the maximum radius of the body 2 of the D-type robot is set to be greater than half of the body width or half of the head width. Preferably, half of the body width is set to 156.25 mm, and the maximum radius of the body 2 of the D-type robot is set to 163.5 mm”).
In Reference to Claim 16
The storage medium of claim 15 (see rejection to claim 15 above), wherein the one or more computer programs further comprises:
instructions for controlling the movable device to move at a normal speed in response to the distance being larger than the first detection radius and less than the second detection radius; instructions for controlling movable device to move at the normal speed in response to the distance being larger than the first detection radius and the angle of the obstacle being not in the second angle interval; instructions for controlling the movable device to move at the normal speed in response to the angle of the obstacle being not in the first angle interval and the distance being less than the second detection radius; and controlling the movable device to move at the normal speed in response to the angle of the obstacle being not in the first angle interval and not in the second angle interval (since Chen does not specify the speed of the moving device when performing the avoiding operated therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that Chen would operate the avoiding operations with normal speeds) (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1).
In Reference to Claim 19
The storage medium of claim 15 (see rejection to claim 15 above), wherein trigger the virtual collision of the movable device comprises: controlling the robot to stop moving; calculating a rotational direction and a rotational angle based on the second coordinate of the obstacle and a movement direction of the movable device; and moving the movable device according to the rotational direction and the rotational angle (system of Chen is capable of performing such functions above) (see at least Yoon Figs. 1-22 and paragraphs 4, 17, 74, 169).
In Reference to Claim 20
The storage medium of claim 15 (see rejection to claim 15 above), wherein trigger the virtual obstacle avoidance of the movable device comprises: obtaining initial speeds of a left wheel and a right wheel of the movable device; calculating an output value of a PID controller of the movable device based on the distance, and a turning speed and an expected obstacle avoidance path of the movable device; determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a right side of the movable device; and determining a speed of the left wheel as the initial speed plus the output value of the PID controller, and a speed of the right wheel as the initial speed minus the output value of the PID controller, in response to the obstacle being on a left side of the movable device (system of Chen is capable of performing such functions above) (see at least Yoon Figs. 1-22 and paragraphs 4, 17, 74, 169).
Claim(s) 3-4, 10-11 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Pub No. 2020/0081454 A1 to Kwak (Kwak).
In Reference to Claim 3
Chen teaches (except for the bolded and italic recitations below):
The method of claim 1 (see rejection to claim 1 above), wherein converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in the coordinate system of the movable device comprises:
forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate of each obstacle; and obtaining, by polling, the first coordinate of the obstacle from the accessible array, and converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into the second coordinate based on the coordinate system of the movable device (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1).
Chen does not teaches (bolded and italic recitation) above as to having accessible array with coordinates within. However, it is known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate. For example, Kwak teaches as to forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate. Kwak further teaches that performing such step provides storing of the coordinates for later use (see at least Kwak Figs. 1-5 and paragraph 344). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chen to perform the step of forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate as taught by Kwak in order to provide storing of the coordinates for later use.
In Reference to Claim 4
The method of claim 3 (see rejection to claim 3 above), wherein before converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in the coordinate system of the movable device, the method further comprises:
determining a center of the movable device; and
establishing the coordinate system of the movable device with the center of the movable device as the origin of the coordinate system, a rightward direction of the movable device as an X axis of the coordinate system, and an upward direction of the movable device as a Y axis of the coordinate system (Chen does not explicitly teaches coordinates having a rightward direction of the movable device as an X axis and an upward direction of the movable device as a Y axis however it is very well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that left to right would have X axis and up and down would be Y axis therefore the system of Chen would have a rightward direction of the movable device as an X axis of the coordinate system, and an upward direction of the movable device as a Y axis of the coordinate system due to having limited about of choices (there are only two choices) and it is very common to have X and Y axis as longitudinal and vertical axis) (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 6 paragraph 5 “Furthermore, within the detection range of the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose 1 (within the effective coverage area of the dotted triangle shown in FIG2 ), when the angle formed by the line connecting the center O1 of the fuselage and the alignment point P among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis O1M1 of the D-type robot increases in the range of 0 to 90 degrees, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance O1P increases. Specifically, the angle formed by the line connecting the center O1 of the fuselage and the alignment point P among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis O1M1 of the D-type robot is directly obtained by the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose 1 and is marked as the alignment point detection angle. , the vertical distance from the center O1 of the fuselage to the boundary line on the front side of the nose 1 is known in advance, wherein the central axis O1M1 of the D-type robot is set to be parallel to the forward direction of the D-type robot, as shown by the arrows corresponding to the forward direction of the robot in Figures 2 to 3; in this embodiment, based on the trigonometric function relationship, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance is set to be equal to the sum of the ratio of the vertical distance from the center O1 of the fuselage to the boundary line on the front side of the nose 1 to the cosine value of the alignment point detection angle and the preset spacing, so that the D-type robot is as close to obstacle #1 as possible before triggering a turn or triggering an obstacle avoidance action, and its In the figure, the proximity between the D-type robot and obstacle #1 is calculated by converting the vertical distance from the center O1 of the fuselage to the boundary line on the front side of the nose 1 to the sum of the trigonometric cosine function conversion value on the line connecting the center O1 of the fuselage and the alignment point P in the front obstacle and the preset spacing, and the preset spacing is set to 1cm to 2cm; the alignment point detection angle is obtained by the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose 1, and the alignment point detection angle formed on”).
In Reference to Claim 10
Chen teaches (except for the bolded and italic recitations below):
The movable device of claim 8 (see rejection to claim 8 above), wherein the instructions for converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in the coordinate system of the movable device comprise: instructions for forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate of each obstacle; and instructions for obtaining, by polling, the first coordinate of the obstacle from the accessible array, and converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into the second coordinate based on the coordinate system of the movable device (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1).
Chen does not teaches (bolded and italic recitation) above as to having accessible array with coordinates within. However, it is known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate. For example, Kwak teaches as to forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate. Kwak further teaches that performing such step provides storing of the coordinates for later use (see at least Kwak Figs. 1-5 and paragraph 344). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chen to perform the step of forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate as taught by Kwak in order to provide storing of the coordinates for later use.
In Reference to Claim 11
The movable device of claim 10 (see rejection to claim 10 above), wherein the one or more computer programs further comprises: instructions for determining a center of the movable device; and instructions for establishing the coordinate system of the movable device with the center of the movable device as the origin of the coordinate system, a rightward direction of the movable device as an X axis of the coordinate system, and an upward direction of the movable device as a Y axis of the coordinate system (Chen does not explicitly teaches coordinates having a rightward direction of the movable device as an X axis and an upward direction of the movable device as a Y axis however it is very well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that left to right would have X axis and up and down would be Y axis therefore the system of Chen would have a rightward direction of the movable device as an X axis of the coordinate system, and an upward direction of the movable device as a Y axis of the coordinate system due to having limited about of choices (there are only two choices) and it is very common to have X and Y axis as longitudinal and vertical axis) (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 6 paragraph 5 “Furthermore, within the detection range of the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose 1 (within the effective coverage area of the dotted triangle shown in FIG2 ), when the angle formed by the line connecting the center O1 of the fuselage and the alignment point P among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis O1M1 of the D-type robot increases in the range of 0 to 90 degrees, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance O1P increases. Specifically, the angle formed by the line connecting the center O1 of the fuselage and the alignment point P among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis O1M1 of the D-type robot is directly obtained by the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose 1 and is marked as the alignment point detection angle. , the vertical distance from the center O1 of the fuselage to the boundary line on the front side of the nose 1 is known in advance, wherein the central axis O1M1 of the D-type robot is set to be parallel to the forward direction of the D-type robot, as shown by the arrows corresponding to the forward direction of the robot in Figures 2 to 3; in this embodiment, based on the trigonometric function relationship, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance is set to be equal to the sum of the ratio of the vertical distance from the center O1 of the fuselage to the boundary line on the front side of the nose 1 to the cosine value of the alignment point detection angle and the preset spacing, so that the D-type robot is as close to obstacle #1 as possible before triggering a turn or triggering an obstacle avoidance action, and its In the figure, the proximity between the D-type robot and obstacle #1 is calculated by converting the vertical distance from the center O1 of the fuselage to the boundary line on the front side of the nose 1 to the sum of the trigonometric cosine function conversion value on the line connecting the center O1 of the fuselage and the alignment point P in the front obstacle and the preset spacing, and the preset spacing is set to 1cm to 2cm; the alignment point detection angle is obtained by the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose 1, and the alignment point detection angle formed on”).
In Reference to Claim 17
Chen teaches (except for the bolded and italic recitations below):
The storage medium of claim 15 (see rejection to claim 15 above), wherein the instructions for converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into second coordinate in the coordinate system of the movable device comprise: instructions for forming an accessible array with the first coordinate of each obstacle; and instructions for obtaining, by polling, the first coordinate of the obstacle from the accessible array, and converting the first coordinate of the obstacle into the second coordinate based on the coordinate system of the movable device (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1).
Chen does not teaches (bolded and italic recitation) above as to having accessible array with coordinates within. However, it is known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate. For example, Kwak teaches as to forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate. Kwak further teaches that performing such step provides storing of the coordinates for later use (see at least Kwak Figs. 1-5 and paragraph 344). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chen to perform the step of forming an accessible array (memory) with the first coordinate as taught by Kwak in order to provide storing of the coordinates for later use.
In Reference to Claim 18
The storage medium of claim 17 (see rejection to claim 17 above), wherein the one or more computer programs further comprises: instructions for determining a center of the movable device; and instructions for establishing the coordinate system of the movable device with the center of the movable device as the origin of the coordinate system, a rightward direction of the movable device as an X axis of the coordinate system, and an upward direction of the movable device as a Y axis of the coordinate system (Chen does not explicitly teaches coordinates having a rightward direction of the movable device as an X axis and an upward direction of the movable device as a Y axis however it is very well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that left to right would have X axis and up and down would be Y axis therefore the system of Chen would have a rightward direction of the movable device as an X axis of the coordinate system, and an upward direction of the movable device as a Y axis of the coordinate system due to having limited about of choices (there are only two choices) and it is very common to have X and Y axis as longitudinal and vertical axis) (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 6 paragraph 5 “Furthermore, within the detection range of the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose 1 (within the effective coverage area of the dotted triangle shown in FIG2 ), when the angle formed by the line connecting the center O1 of the fuselage and the alignment point P among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis O1M1 of the D-type robot increases in the range of 0 to 90 degrees, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance O1P increases. Specifically, the angle formed by the line connecting the center O1 of the fuselage and the alignment point P among the obstacles in front relative to the central axis O1M1 of the D-type robot is directly obtained by the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose 1 and is marked as the alignment point detection angle. , the vertical distance from the center O1 of the fuselage to the boundary line on the front side of the nose 1 is known in advance, wherein the central axis O1M1 of the D-type robot is set to be parallel to the forward direction of the D-type robot, as shown by the arrows corresponding to the forward direction of the robot in Figures 2 to 3; in this embodiment, based on the trigonometric function relationship, the preset obstacle avoidance trigger distance is set to be equal to the sum of the ratio of the vertical distance from the center O1 of the fuselage to the boundary line on the front side of the nose 1 to the cosine value of the alignment point detection angle and the preset spacing, so that the D-type robot is as close to obstacle #1 as possible before triggering a turn or triggering an obstacle avoidance action, and its In the figure, the proximity between the D-type robot and obstacle #1 is calculated by converting the vertical distance from the center O1 of the fuselage to the boundary line on the front side of the nose 1 to the sum of the trigonometric cosine function conversion value on the line connecting the center O1 of the fuselage and the alignment point P in the front obstacle and the preset spacing, and the preset spacing is set to 1cm to 2cm; the alignment point detection angle is obtained by the line laser sensor installed on the front side of the nose 1, and the alignment point detection angle formed on”).
Claim(s) 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Pub No. US 2022/0061616 A1 to Yoon et. al. (Yoon).
In Reference to Claim 7
Chen teaches (except for the bolded and italic recitations below):
The method of claim 1 (see rejection to claim 1 above), wherein the sensor includes a forward obstacle avoidance sensor (M1), a sideway obstacle avoidance sensor (M2), and a lidar; and obtaining, through the sensor of the movable device, first coordinate of the obstacle in the map coordinate system comprises:
obtaining, through the forward obstacle avoidance sensor (M1), the first coordinate of the obstacle within a fixed distance in front of the movable device;
obtaining, through the sideway obstacle avoidance sensor (M2), the first coordinate of obstacles within a fixed distance beside the movable device; and
obtaining, through the lidar, the first coordinate of the obstacle within a fixed distance above the movable device (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1).
Chen does not teaches (bolded and italic recitations above) of having Lidar sensor and obtaining, through the lidar, the first coordinate of the obstacle within a fixed distance above the movable device. However, it is known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Lidar sensor and obtaining, through the lidar, the first coordinate of the obstacle within a fixed distance above the movable device. For example, Yoon teaches to have Lidar sensor and obtaining, through the lidar, the first coordinate of the obstacle within a fixed distance above the movable device. Yoon further teaches that having such sensor provides improvement of localization and mapping to the system (see at least Yoon Figs. 1-22 and paragraphs 4, 17, 74, 169). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify system of Chen with Lidar sensor as taught by Yoon in order to improves the localization and mapping to the system.
In Reference to Claim 14
Chen teaches (except for the bolded and italic recitations below):
The movable device of claim 8 (see rejection to claim 8 above), wherein the sensor includes a forward obstacle avoidance sensor (M1), a sideway obstacle avoidance sensor (M2), and a lidar; and the instructions for obtaining, through the sensor of the movable device, first coordinate of the obstacle in the map coordinate system comprise: instructions for obtaining, through the forward obstacle avoidance sensor (M1), the first coordinate of the obstacle within a fixed distance in front of the movable device; instructions for obtaining, through the sideway obstacle avoidance sensor (M2), the first coordinate of obstacles within a fixed distance beside the movable device; and instructions for obtaining, through the lidar, the first coordinate of the obstacle within a fixed distance above the movable device (see at least Chen Figs. 1-5 and page 1 paragraph 4, page 2 paragraphs 4-5 and page 8 paragraph 1).
Chen does not teaches (bolded and italic recitations above) of having Lidar sensor and obtaining, through the lidar, the first coordinate of the obstacle within a fixed distance above the movable device. However, it is known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Lidar sensor and obtaining, through the lidar, the first coordinate of the obstacle within a fixed distance above the movable device. For example, Yoon teaches to have Lidar sensor and obtaining, through the lidar, the first coordinate of the obstacle within a fixed distance above the movable device. Yoon further teaches that having such sensor provides improvement of localization and mapping to the system (see at least Yoon Figs. 1-22 and paragraphs 4, 17, 74, 169). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify system of Chen with Lidar sensor as taught by Yoon in order to improves the localization and mapping to the system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pub No. US 2020/0069140 A1 to Orzechowski et. al. (Orzechowski) teaches coordinating the obstacle into the mapping system and avoiding the obstacles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON DONGPA LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-3525. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 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, Aniss Chad can be reached at (571) 270-3832. 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.
/BRANDON D LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662 July 25, 2026
Prosecution Insights