DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-18 of US Application No. 19/231,644, filed on 06/09/2025, are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information Disclosure Statement filed on 06/09/2025 has been considered. An initialed copy of form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 14 recites “…wherein the site further comprises a plurality of automated vehicles and a plurality of manually controlled vehicles.” However, claim 14 depends from claim 13 and claim 13 recites the same limitation: “A site comprising the computer system of claim 1, wherein the site further comprises at least one automated vehicle and at least one site operator, and wherein the site further comprises a plurality of automated vehicles and a plurality of manually controlled vehicles.” (Emphasis added) Therefore, claim 14 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 13 and is rejected under 35 USC §112d. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because a claim whose broadest reasonable interpretation covers both statutory and non-statutory embodiments embraces subject matter that is not eligible for patent protection and therefore is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Non-limiting examples of claims that are not directed to any of the statutory categories include:
Products that do not have a physical or tangible form, such as information (often referred to as "data per se") or a computer program per se (often referred to as "software per se") when claimed as a product without any structural recitations;
Transitory forms of signal transmission (often referred to as "signals per se"), such as a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal or carrier wave; and
Subject matter that the statute expressly prohibits from being patented, such as humans per se, which are excluded under The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA ), Public Law 112-29, sec. 33, 125 Stat. 284 (September 16, 2011).
Regarding claim 17, the preamble recites “A computer program product comprising code for perform…” In light of the instant specification, the computer program product appears to comprise software elements. None of the comprising elements of the claimed system appear to be physical components.
Therefore the “computer program product” of claim 17 is computer software per se and is not a “process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter" as defined in 35 U.S.C. 101. See MPEP 2106.03.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 9, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Aizawa et al. (US 2020/0399863 A1, “Aizawa”).
Regarding claim 1, Aizawa discloses work machine, information processing apparatus, and information processing method and teaches:
A computer system comprising processing circuitry configured to be in a site operating mode for controlling the operation on a site (a site monitoring system SYS according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. 1 – See at least ¶ [0061] The management apparatus 300 is, for example, a server apparatus that is installed in a management center provided outside the worksite where the excavator 100 carries out the work and is configured mainly by one or more server computers. In this case, the server apparatus may be an in-house server operated by a business worker operating the site monitoring system SYS or a related business worker related to the business worker, or the server apparatus may be a so-called cloud server – See at least ¶ [0076]; The excavator 100 includes an excavator controller 30A, an ECM 30B, a surrounding monitor controller 30C, an imaging apparatus 40, a display apparatus 50 , a voice sound output apparatus 52, a gate lock valve 54, a communication device 60, and a permission operation unit 62 – See at least ¶ [0081]; Examiner notes that the system of Fig. 1 comprises a variety of computers, controllers, and circuitry as described above and elsewhere in the disclosure.) comprising at least one automated vehicle (The operation limiting unit 304C limits the operation of an operation element of the excavator 100 when a monitor target is detected in the monitor area by the detecting unit 302C. At this time, the operation element to be the target of the operation limitation includes some of or all of the lower traveling body 1, the upper turning body 3, the boom 4, the arm 5, and the bucket 6 – See at least ¶ [0137]; Examiner notes that the limiting unit 304C acts to autonomously operate the vehicle in response to a detected even. See also ¶ [0256]) and a site operator, (The support apparatus 200 (an example of an external apparatus, an information processing apparatus, or a user terminal) is a mobile terminal possessed by a user (e.g., a worker or supervisor of a worksite of the excavator 100). The support apparatus 200 may be, for example, a general-purpose notebook PC, a tablet terminal, a smart phone, and the like possessed by a user. The support apparatus 200 may be an exclusive-use terminal for confirming the surrounding status information regarding the excavator 100 – See at least ¶ [0074]; In addition to the site operators positioned at the Management Apparatus 300 and in-vehicle, the system also contains a Support Apparatus site operator as provided above.) wherein the processing circuitry is configured, in a site operating mode, to: (The operator and the like performs a determination operation through the touch panel or the operation part 50B as appropriate. Accordingly, remote operation for site monitoring of the excavator 100 is permitted to the selected support apparatus 200, by the permission operation unit 62. At this time, the support apparatus 200 for which the remote operation related to the surrounding monitoring of the excavator 100 is permitted, is registered in permitted terminal information 3082C of the storage unit 308C to be described later. Further, information regarding the support apparatus 200 for which the remote operation regarding the site monitoring of the excavator 100 is permitted, is reported to the management apparatus 300 through the communication device 60 by the permission operation unit 62 (the remote operation permission operation screen 400). Accordingly, the management apparatus 300 can recognize and manage the support apparatus 200 for which remote operation of the site monitoring is permitted, on a per-excavator 100 basis – See at least ¶ [0106])
receive, from a requester, a restriction request; (In step S14, when the worker W notices that the truck TK has entered the construction site, he/she operates the support apparatus 200 to transmit an attention evocation instruction, and the support apparatus 200 transmits the attention evocation instruction to the excavator 100 in accordance with the transmission operation by the worker W – See at least ¶ [0606]; Examiner notes that the “attention evocation instruction” is a “restriction request”.)
set the at least one automated vehicle in the restricted mode based on said restriction request, (In step S16, the excavator 100 receives the attention evocation instruction from the support apparatus 200 and starts outputting an attention evocation alarm in response to the attention evocation instruction – See at least ¶ [0607]; Then, the excavator 100 starts the operation limitation after the attention evocation instruction is started – See at least ¶ [0610])
receive, from the requester, a resume request; (In step S18, when it is confirmed that the truck TK has moved away from the excavator 100, the worker W operates the support apparatus 200 to transmit a cancel instruction, and the support apparatus 200 transmits the cancel instruction to the excavator 100 in accordance with the transmission operation by the worker W. – See at least ¶ [0611])
in response to the resume request receive, from the site operator, a resume instruction; and (In step S20, the excavator 100 receives the cancel instruction from the support apparatus 200 and cancels the attention evocation alarm and the operation limitation in response to the cancel instruction. This allows the excavator 100 to return to performing normal operations – See at least ¶ [0612])
set the at least one automated vehicle in a non-restricted mode at least based on the resume instruction. (In step S20, the excavator 100 receives the cancel instruction from the support apparatus 200 and cancels the attention evocation alarm and the operation limitation in response to the cancel instruction. This allows the excavator 100 to return to performing normal operations – See at least ¶ [0612])
Regarding claim 2, Aizawa further teaches:
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to be in a requester operating mode, wherein, in the requester operating mode, the processing circuitry is configured to: (The monitor function switch 72 is provided, for example, near the operator seat in the cabin 10 and is an operation unit used by an operator and the like for turning on/off the monitor function by the surrounding monitoring apparatus 150. That is, the monitor function switch 72 is an operation unit for enabling or disabling the functions of the alarm output and the operation limitation of the excavator 100 executed based on the detection of a monitor target. For example, when the monitor function is enabled in response to an operation by an operator and the like with respect to the monitor function switch 72, the functions of the display control unit 3011, the detecting unit 3012, the tracking unit 3013, the alarm output unit 3014, and the operation limiting unit 3015, which will be described later, are enabled. On the other hand, for example, when the monitor function is disabled in response to an operation by an operator and the like with respect to the monitor function switch 72, all functions of the display control unit 3011 (at least the functional portion relating to the monitor function), the detecting unit 3012, the tracking unit 3013, the alarm output unit 3014, and the operation limiting unit 3015 become disabled – See at least ¶ [0332]-[0334])
receive, from a requester, a restriction request, (The operation limiting unit 304C limits the operation of an operation element of the excavator 100 when a monitor target is detected in the monitor area by the detecting unit 302C. At this time, the operation element to be the target of the operation limitation includes some of or all of the lower traveling body 1, the upper turning body 3, the boom 4, the arm 5, and the bucket 6. For example, the operation limiting unit 304C causes the gate lock valve 54 to switch the pilot line into a non-communication state by transmitting an instruction signal (ON signal) to the gate lock valve 54 – See at least ¶ [0128]; Examiner notes that the operation limits are engaged in response to a notification from the detecting unit that a target is detected, i.e., a restriction request.)
set the at least one automated vehicle in a restricted mode based on said restriction request, (Accordingly, the hydraulic oil (pilot pressure) is not supplied from the pilot pump (not illustrated) to an operation apparatus (not illustrated) which operates the operation element of the excavator 100, so that the operation element of the excavator 100 is prevented from operating even if an operator inputs an operation to the operation apparatus – See at least ¶ [0128])
receive, from the requester, a resume request; (The operation limiting unit 304C cancels the operation limitation of the excavator 100 when the monitor target detected by the detecting unit 302C is no longer detected or when the above-described cancel operation is performed after the start of the operation limitation of the excavator 100 – See at least ¶ [0141]; Examiner notes that the system allows resume of non-limited operation when a target leaves the area, i.e., in response to a signal from the detecting unit 302c or when an operator requests a cancelation. Both of which are a “resume request”.)
set the at least one automated vehicle in a non-restricted mode at least based on said resume request. (The operation limiting unit 304C cancels the operation limitation of the excavator 100 when the monitor target detected by the detecting unit 302C is no longer detected or when the above-described cancel operation is performed after the start of the operation limitation of the excavator 100 – See at least ¶ [0141])
Regarding claim 3, Aizawa further teaches:
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: receive an instruction, from the site operator, to operate in the requester operating mode or the site operating mode. (The instruction unit 2101 (an example of a transmitting unit) transmits a site monitor instruction, which is addressed to the excavator 100, to the management apparatus 300 through the communication device 220 when a predetermined operation by a user is performed through the operation apparatus 230. For example, FIG. 7 (FIGS. 7A and 7B) illustrates an example of an operation screen for transmitting a site monitor instruction (hereinafter referred to as the “instruction transmission operation screen”) displayed on the dis play apparatus 240. Specifically, FIG. 7A is a diagram illustrating an example of an operation screen (instruction transmission operation screen 700) for selecting the excavator 100 that is the destination of the site monitor instruction, that is, an operation screen for selecting the excavator 100 that is the target of a remote operation – See at least ¶ [0172])
Regarding claim 4, Aizawa further teaches:
wherein the requester is an operator of at least one manually controlled vehicle or the site operator. (The instruction unit 2101 (an example of a transmitting unit) transmits a site monitor instruction, which is addressed to the excavator 100, to the management apparatus 300 through the communication device 220 when a predetermined operation by a user is performed through the operation apparatus 230 – See at least ¶ [0172]; Examiner notes that the operator of support apparatus 200 is a “site operator”.)
Regarding claim 7, Aizawa further teaches:
wherein the site comprises at least one manually controlled vehicle, and wherein the processing circuitry is further configured in the site operating mode to: (In the present embodiment, the excavator 100 operates in response to the operation of an operator getting into the cabin 10, but may be remotely operated by input operations received from an external apparatus (e.g., the management apparatus 300) through the communication device 60 – See at least ¶ [0254])
set the at least one manually controlled vehicle in a restricted mode based on said restriction request; and (The operation limiting unit 304C limits the operation of an operation element of the excavator 100 when a monitor target is detected in the monitor area by the detecting unit 302C. At this time, the operation element to be the target of the operation limitation includes some of or all of the lower traveling body 1, the upper turning body 3, the boom 4, the arm 5, and the bucket 6. For example, the operating limiting unit 304 causes the gate lock valve 54 to switch the pilot line into a non-communication state by transmitting an instruction signal (ON signal) to the gate lock valve 54. Accordingly, the hydraulic oil (pilot pressure) is not supplied from the pilot pump (not illustrated) to an operation apparatus (not illustrated) which operates the operation element of the excavator 100, so that the operation element of the excavator 100 is prevented from operating even if an operator inputs an operation to the operation apparatus – See at least ¶ [0137])
set the at least one manually controlled vehicle in a non-restricted mode based on the resume instruction. (The operation limiting unit 304C cancels the operation limitation of the excavator 100 when the monitor target detected by the detecting unit 302C is no longer detected or when the above-described cancel operation is performed after the start of the operation limitation of the excavator 100 – See at least ¶ [0141])
Regarding claim 9, Aizawa further teaches:
wherein in the restricted mode the operation of the vehicle comprises at least one of reducing the speed of the vehicle, activating safety functions of the vehicle, stopping the operations of the vehicle. (Then, the excavator 100 starts the operation limitation after the attention evocation instruction is started. Accordingly, the excavator 100 (the controller 30) can prevent contact and the like with an approaching truck TK caused by the operation of the excavator 100 – See at least ¶ [0610]; Examiner notes that the operation limitations include stopping the vehicle entirely or slowing its speed – See at least ¶ [0137]-[0140])
Regarding claim 10, Aizawa further teaches:
wherein the site comprises a plurality of automated vehicles and wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to set all automated vehicles within an area of the site in a restricted mode based on the restriction request. (when the support apparatus 200 is connected to a plurality of the excavators 100 by P2P, the attention evocation instruction unit 2105 broadcasts the attention evocation instruction to the plurality of the excavators 100. Accordingly, the user can evoke the attention of an operator of each of the plurality of the excavators 100 towards the surrounding status, by a single operation of transmitting an attention evocation instruction – See at least ¶ [0594]; Examiner notes that the attention evocation instruction triggers an operational limit – See at least ¶ [0610])
Regarding claim 12, Aizawa further teaches:
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine that the computer system is to operate in the requester operating mode or the site operating mode. (The monitor function switch 72 is provided, for example, near the operator seat in the cabin 10 and is an operation unit used by an operator and the like for turning on/off the monitor function by the surrounding monitoring apparatus 150. That is, the monitor function switch 72 is an operation unit for enabling or disabling the functions of the alarm output and the operation limitation of the excavator 100 executed based on the detection of a monitor target. For example, when the monitor function is enabled in response to an operation by an operator and the like with respect to the monitor function switch 72, the functions of the display control unit 3011, the detecting unit 3012, the tracking unit 3013, the alarm output unit 3014, and the operation limiting unit 3015, which will be described later, are enabled. On the other hand, for example, when the monitor function is disabled in response to an operation by an operator and the like with respect to the monitor function switch 72, all functions of the display control unit 3011 (at least the functional portion relating to the monitor function), the detecting unit 3012, the tracking unit 3013, the alarm output unit 3014, and the operation limiting unit 3015 become disabled – See at least ¶ [0332]-[0334])
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aizawa, as applied to claim 1, and in further view of Nishii et al. (US 2024/0028037 A1 “Nishii”)
Regarding claim 5, Aizawa does not explicitly teach wherein the restriction request comprises position data relating to a geographical area, and wherein the at least one automated vehicle is set in the restricted mode in said geographical area. However, Nishii autonomous travel method, autonomous travel system, and autonomous travel program and teaches:
wherein the restriction request comprises position data relating to a geographical area, and wherein the at least one automated vehicle is set in the restricted mode in said geographical area. (FIG. 16 shows an example in which the work vehicle 10 travels on the inter-field route R12 and moves to the field F2 after finishing work in the field F1. As shown in FIG. 12A, when the work vehicle 10 finishes work along the target route R1 in the field F1, the travel processor 111 causes the work vehicle 10 to autonomously travel on the interpolation route r31 from the travel end position G1 to the route start position Ts1 of the inter-field route R12. The route start position Ts1 is set at the entrance/exit Hl of the field F1, for example, as shown in FIG. 16. When the work vehicle 10 reaches the route start position Ts1 of the inter-field route R12, the travel processor 111 causes the work vehicle 10 to be stopped temporarily at the route start position Ts1 – See at least ¶ [0173] and Fig. 16; The Examiner notes that the system is stopped, i.e., a restricted mode, based on its geographical location, e.g., area H1.)
In summary, Aizawa discloses providing a restriction request in response to a positional relationship, i.e., distance between two objects, but does not explicitly teach a restriction request comprising position data relating to a geographical area, and wherein the at least one automated vehicle is set in the restricted mode in said geographical area. However, Nishii discloses autonomous travel method, autonomous travel system, and autonomous travel program and teaches automated work vehicles moving to an entrance/exit area and then stopping operation, i.e., restriction mode, to wait for operator approval to continue moving.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the work machine, information processing apparatus, and information processing method of Aizawa to provide for the autonomous travel method, system, and program, as taught in Nishii, to provide an autonomous travel method, system, and program capable of improving safety and a traveling efficiency of a work vehicle autonomously traveling between multiple areas. (At Nishii ¶ [0005])
Regarding claim 6, Aizawa does not explicitly teach, but Nishii further teaches:
wherein the resume request comprises position data relating to a geographical area, and wherein the at least one automated vehicle is set in the non-restricted mode in said geographical area. (After the travel processor 111 causes the work vehicle 10 to be stopped at the route start position Ts1, the announcement process unit 112 causes the work vehicle 10 and the operation terminal 20 to announce the travel information. The travel information includes at least one of stop information indicating that the work vehicle 10 stops and inquiry information inquiring whether or not to cause the work vehicle 10 to resume traveling. The operation terminal 20 which makes an announcement may be an operation terminal operated by the operator of the work vehicle 10 or an operation terminal operated by a supervisor who monitors the work vehicle 10. That is, the user of the present disclosure include the operator, the supervisor, the worker, etc. – See at least ¶ [0174]; On the travel screen D4 (see FIG. 17), the operator A can issue a command to cause the work vehicle 10 to cancel the temporary stopping state and resume the autonomous travel – See at least ¶ [0177])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the work machine, information processing apparatus, and information processing method of Aizawa to provide for the autonomous travel method, system, and program, as taught in Nishii, to provide an autonomous travel method, system, and program capable of improving safety and a traveling efficiency of a work vehicle autonomously traveling between multiple areas. (At Nishii ¶ [0005])
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aizawa in further view of Ricci et al. (US 2018/0011483 A1 “Ricci”)
Regarding claim 8, Aizawa does not explicitly teach wherein the processing circuitry is further configured in the site operating mode to: receive, from a first requester, a first restriction request; set the at least one automated vehicle in the restricted mode based on said first restriction request, receive, from a second requester, a second restriction request; set the at least one automated vehicle in the restricted mode based on said second restriction request, receive, from the first requester, a first resume request; receive, from the second requester, a second resume request; in response to the second resume request receive, from the site operator, a resume instruction; and set the at least one automated vehicle in a non-restricted mode at least based on the second resume instruction. However, Ricci discloses conditional or temporary feature availability and teaches:
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured in the site operating mode to: (Furthermore, the controller/microprocessor 1920 can perform operations for configuring and transmitting/receiving information as described herein. The controller/microprocessor 1920 may include multiple processor cores, and/or implement multiple virtual processors. Optionally, the controller/microprocessor 1920 may include multiple physical processors. By way of example, the controller/microprocessor 1920 may comprise a specially configured Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) or other integrated circuit, a digital signal processor(s), a controller, a hardwired electronic or logic circuit, a programmable logic device or gate array, a special purpose computer, or the like – See at least ¶ [0120])
receive, from a first requester, a first restriction request; (For example, information can be exchanged between the remote operator system 240 and the vehicle 100 that can comprise configuration parameters for various functions of the vehicle. In some cases, these parameters may limit or set levels for the performance and/or availability of some vehicle functions – See at least ¶ [0151])
set the at least one automated vehicle in the restricted mode based on said first restriction request, (These parameters may be set at the time of purchase or lease of the vehicle based on conditions of an agreement at the time, e.g., features paid for by the purchaser or lessor and can be propagated to the remote operator system 240, vehicle database 210 repair facility, vehicle 100 etc. Similarly, these parameters can be changed at times and the changes propagated through the various elements of the environment as may be appropriate – See at least ¶ [0151])
receive, from a second requester, a second restriction request; (According to one embodiment, the user can request changes in the levels applied or imposed on features of the vehicle through buttons 2205A or 2205B, touch panels of the various displays 420, 424, or 428, or other input mechanisms – See at least ¶ [0165])
set the at least one automated vehicle in the restricted mode based on said second restriction request, (This request can, according to one embodiment, then be sent to another element such as the remote operator system 240, which can determine whether to authorize the request, e.g., based on a payment made by the user and/or another one or more conditions – See at least ¶ [0165])
receive, from the first requester, a first resume request; (If authorized, the remote operator system 240 or other element can provide updated parameters or otherwise signal the vehicle 100 to apply the requested change – See at least ¶ [0165])
receive, from the second requester, a second resume request; (This request can, according to one embodiment, then be sent to another element such as the remote operator system 240, which can determine whether to authorize the request, e.g., based on a payment made by the user and/or another one or more conditions – See at least ¶ [0165])
in response to the second resume request receive, from the site operator, a resume instruction; and (If authorized, the remote operator system 240 or other element can provide updated parameters or otherwise signal the vehicle 100 to apply the requested change – See at least ¶ [0165])
set the at least one automated vehicle in a non-restricted mode at least based on the second resume instruction. (At some point after the set of initial parameters have been provided to and applied by the vehicle, the remote operator system can receive 2435 a request for a set of updated parameters. In some cases, the request can be received from the vehicle over the network connection. A determination 2440 can be made by the remote operator system as to whether the update, i.e., whether the override or increase of the limit imposed by the set of initial parameters, is authorized – See at least ¶ [0174])
In summary, Aizawa teaches remote vehicle operational systems that require two steps or two actors to operate and/or limit the vehicle. For example, an operator on the vehicle may disable remote monitoring or remote vehicle operation may be suspended if the operator is out vehicle and within a certain distance from the vehicle. These situations are similar to two separate requests for limits and then the resumption of operation based on two requests (conditions). Aizawa does not explicitly teach wherein the processing circuitry is further configured in the site operating mode to: receive, from a first requester, a first restriction request; set the at least one automated vehicle in the restricted mode based on said first restriction request, receive, from a second requester, a second restriction request; set the at least one automated vehicle in the restricted mode based on said second restriction request, receive, from the first requester, a first resume request; receive, from the second requester, a second resume request; in response to the second resume request receive, from the site operator, a resume instruction; and set the at least one automated vehicle in a non-restricted mode at least based on the second resume instruction. However, Ricci discloses conditional or temporary feature availability and teaches a system wherein the limitations are set by a remote entity, these limitations are requested to be modified by an in vehicle operator. If that request is authorized by the remote entity then the limitations are removed and/or adjusted. This creates a system where one requester makes an original request, a second requester makes a second request, then if the first and second request are approved then operation of the vehicle can be made without limitations.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the work machine, information processing apparatus, and information processing method of Aizawa to provide for the conditional or temporary feature availability, as taught in Ricci, for providing a temporary increase in availability or functionality of a power source in a vehicle which corresponds to the prevention of a disablement of the vehicle, prevention of a degradation of performance or other aspect of vehicle operation, or some other prevention of adverse effects on vehicle safety or operation. (At Ricci ¶ [0006])
Claim(s) 11 and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aizawa in further view of Hiranaka et al. (US 2022/0198927 A1 “Hiranaka”)
Regarding claim 11, Aizawa further teaches:
wherein the site comprises a plurality of automated vehicles and [] manually controlled vehicles and wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to set all automated vehicles and all and all manually controlled vehicles within an area of the site in a restricted mode based on the restriction request. (when the support apparatus 200 is connected to a plurality of the excavators 100 by P2P, the attention evocation instruction unit 2105 broadcasts the attention evocation instruction to the plurality of the excavators 100. Accordingly, the user can evoke the attention of an operator of each of the plurality of the excavators 100 towards the surrounding status, by a single operation of transmitting an attention evocation instruction – See at least ¶ [0594]; Examiner notes that the attention evocation instruction triggers an operational limit – See at least ¶ [0610])
Aizawa does not explicitly teach a plurality of manually controlled vehicles. However, Hiranaka discloses management system of work site and management method of work site and teaches:
wherein the site comprises a plurality of automated vehicles and a plurality of manually controlled vehicles and wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to set all automated vehicles and all and all manually controlled vehicles within an area of the site in a restricted mode [] (FIG. 1 is a diagram schematically illustrating an example of a management system 1, an unmanned vehicle 2, a manned vehicle 9, and a loader 7 according to the present embodiment. Each of the unmanned vehicle 2, the manned vehicle 9, and the loader 7 operates at a work site – See at least ¶ [0027]; As illustrated in FIG. 16, when a plurality of the unmanned vehicles 2 or the manned vehicles 9 waiting at the entrance of the loading place LPA exists, the allocation execution unit 3D can allocate the leading unmanned vehicle 2 or manned vehicle 9 among the plurality of unmanned vehicles 2 or manned vehicles 9 waiting at the entrance of the loading place LPA to the loading point LP – See at least ¶ [0112] and Fig. 16-18; Examiner notes that the allocation is performing a restriction mode on the vehicles to prevent them from moving outside of their allocated time.)
In summary, Aizawa discloses setting all of a plurality of work vehicles within a work site to a restricted mode. Aizawa further teaches that the work vehicles within the site are autonomous and have the ability to manually controlled. While this suggests a mix of manned and unmanned work vehicles, Aizawa does not explicitly teach a plurality of manually controlled vehicles in an area. However, Hiranaka discloses management systems and methods of a work site and teaches managing a mixed grouping of a plurality of manned and unmanned vehicles. This management includes allocating travel timings, i.e., restricting movements, to ensure vehicles do not collide.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the work machine, information processing apparatus, and information processing method of Aizawa to provide for the management system and method of a work site, as taught in Hiranaka, to operate the unmanned vehicle and the manned vehicle without decreasing an operation rate of the unmanned vehicle and the manned vehicle. (At Hiranaka ¶ [0004])
Regarding claim 13, Aizawa does not explicitly teach, but Hiranaka further teaches:
wherein the site further comprises at least one automated vehicle and at least one site operator, and wherein the site further comprises a plurality of automated vehicles and a plurality of manually controlled vehicles. (FIG. 1 is a diagram schematically illustrating an example of a management system 1, an unmanned vehicle 2, a manned vehicle 9, and a loader 7 according to the present embodiment. Each of the unmanned vehicle 2, the manned vehicle 9, and the loader 7 operates at a work site – See at least ¶ [0027]; As illustrated in FIG. 16, when a plurality of the unmanned vehicles 2 or the manned vehicles 9 waiting at the entrance of the loading place LPA exists, the allocation execution unit 3D can allocate the leading unmanned vehicle 2 or manned vehicle 9 among the plurality of unmanned vehicles 2 or manned vehicles 9 waiting at the entrance of the loading place LPA to the loading point LP – See at least ¶ [0112] and Fig. 16-18)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the work machine, information processing apparatus, and information processing method of Aizawa to provide for the management system and method of a work site, as taught in Hiranaka, to operate the unmanned vehicle and the manned vehicle without decreasing an operation rate of the unmanned vehicle and the manned vehicle. (At Hiranaka ¶ [0004])
Regarding claim 14, Aizawa does not explicitly teach, but Hiranaka further teaches:
wherein the site further comprises a plurality of automated vehicles and a plurality of manually controlled vehicles. (FIG. 1 is a diagram schematically illustrating an example of a management system 1, an unmanned vehicle 2, a manned vehicle 9, and a loader 7 according to the present embodiment. Each of the unmanned vehicle 2, the manned vehicle 9, and the loader 7 operates at a work site – See at least ¶ [0027]; As illustrated in FIG. 16, when a plurality of the unmanned vehicles 2 or the manned vehicles 9 waiting at the entrance of the loading place LPA exists, the allocation execution unit 3D can allocate the leading unmanned vehicle 2 or manned vehicle 9 among the plurality of unmanned vehicles 2 or manned vehicles 9 waiting at the entrance of the loading place LPA to the loading point LP – See at least ¶ [0112] and Fig. 16-18)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the work machine, information processing apparatus, and information processing method of Aizawa to provide for the management system and method of a work site, as taught in Hiranaka, to operate the unmanned vehicle and the manned vehicle without decreasing an operation rate of the unmanned vehicle and the manned vehicle. (At Hiranaka ¶ [0004])
Regarding claims 15, 17, and 18, Aizawa discloses work machine, information processing apparatus, and information processing method and teaches:
A computer-implemented method for controlling the operation on a site in a site operating mode, (a site monitoring system SYS according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG . 1 – See at least ¶ [0061] The management apparatus 300 is, for example, a server apparatus that is installed in a management center provided outside the worksite where the excavator 100 carries out the work and is configured mainly by one or more server computers. In this case, the server apparatus may be an in-house server operated by a business worker operating the site monitoring system SYS or a related business worker related to the business worker, or the server apparatus may be a so-called cloud server – See at least ¶ [0076]; The excavator 100 includes an excavator controller 30A, an ECM 30B, a surrounding monitor controller 30C, an imaging apparatus 40, a display apparatus 50 , a voice sound output apparatus 52, a gate lock valve 54, a communication device 60, and a permission operation unit 62 – See at least ¶ [0081]; Examiner notes that the system of Fig. 1 comprises a variety of computers, controllers, and circuitry as described above and elsewhere in the disclosure.) wherein the site comprises at least one automated vehicle (The operation limiting unit 304C limits the operation of an operation element of the excavator 100 when a monitor target is detected in the monitor area by the detecting unit 302C. At this time, the operation element to be the target of the operation limitation includes some of or all of the lower traveling body 1, the upper turning body 3, the boom 4, the arm 5, and the bucket 6 – See at least ¶ [0137]; Examiner notes that the limiting unit 304C acts to autonomously operate the vehicle in response to a detected even. See also ¶ [0256]) and a site operator; (The support apparatus 200 (an example of an external apparatus, an information processing apparatus, or a user terminal) is a mobile terminal possessed by a user (e.g., a worker or supervisor of a worksite of the excavator 100). The support apparatus 200 may be, for example, a general-purpose notebook PC, a tablet terminal, a smart phone, and the like possessed by a user. The support apparatus 200 may be an exclusive-use terminal for confirming the surrounding status information regarding the excavator 100 – See at least ¶ [0074]; In addition to the site operators positioned at the Management Apparatus 300 and in-vehicle, the system also contains a Support Apparatus site operator as provided above.)
wherein the method comprises, for the site operating mode: (The invention directed towards a method for performing the functions, i.e., site operating, of the invention – See at least ¶ [0656]-[0659])
receive, by the processing circuitry, a restriction request from a requester; (In step S14, when the worker W notices that the truck TK has entered the construction site, he/she operates the support apparatus 200 to transmit an attention evocation instruction, and the support apparatus 200 transmits the attention evocation instruction to the excavator 100 in accordance with the transmission operation by the worker W – See at least ¶ [0606]; Examiner notes that the “attention evocation instruction” is a “restriction request”.)
set, by the processing circuitry, the at least one automated vehicle in the restricted mode based on said restriction request, (In step S16, the excavator 100 receives the attention evocation instruction from the support apparatus 200 and starts outputting an attention evocation alarm in response to the attention evocation instruction – See at least ¶ [0607]; Then, the excavator 100 starts the operation limitation after the attention evocation instruction is started – See at least ¶ [0610])
receive, by the processing circuitry, a resume request from the requester; (In step S18, when it is confirmed that the truck TK has moved away from the excavator 100, the worker W operates the support apparatus 200 to transmit a cancel instruction, and the support apparatus 200 transmits the cancel instruction to the excavator 100 in accordance with the transmission operation by the worker W – See at least ¶ [0611])
in response to the resume request, receive, by the processing circuitry, a resume instruction from a site operator, (In step S20, the excavator 100 receives the cancel instruction from the support apparatus 200 and cancels the attention evocation alarm and the operation limitation in response to the cancel instruction. This allows the excavator 100 to return to performing normal operations – See at least ¶ [0612]) and set, by the processing circuitry, the at least one automated vehicle in a non-restricted mode based on the resume instruction, [] (In step S20, the excavator 100 receives the cancel instruction from the support apparatus 200 and cancels the attention evocation alarm and the operation limitation in response to the cancel instruction. This allows the excavator 100 to return to performing normal operations – See at least ¶ [0612])
Aizawa does not explicitly teach a plurality of manually controlled vehicles. However, Hiranaka discloses management system of work site and management method of work site and teaches:
[] wherein the site further comprises a plurality of automated vehicles and a plurality of manually controlled vehicles and wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to set all automated vehicles and all manually controlled vehicles within an area of the site in a restricted mode based on the restriction request. (FIG. 1 is a diagram schematically illustrating an example of a management system 1, an unmanned vehicle 2, a manned vehicle 9, and a loader 7 according to the present embodiment. Each of the unmanned vehicle 2, the manned vehicle 9, and the loader 7 operates at a work site – See at least ¶ [0027]; As illustrated in FIG. 16, when a plurality of the unmanned vehicles 2 or the manned vehicles 9 waiting at the entrance of the loading place LPA exists, the allocation execution unit 3D can allocate the leading unmanned vehicle 2 or manned vehicle 9 among the plurality of unmanned vehicles 2 or manned vehicles 9 waiting at the entrance of the loading place LPA to the loading point LP – See at least ¶ [0112] and Fig. 16-18)
In summary, Aizawa discloses setting all of a plurality of work vehicles within a work site to a restricted mode. Aizawa further teaches that the work vehicles within the site are autonomous and have the ability to manually controlled. While this suggests a mix of manned and unmanned work vehicles, Aizawa does not explicitly teach a plurality of manually controlled vehicles in an area. However, Hiranaka discloses management systems and methods of a work site and teaches managing a mixed grouping of a plurality of manned and unmanned vehicles. This management includes allocating travel timings, i.e., restricting movements, to ensure vehicles do not collide.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the work machine, information processing apparatus, and information processing method of Aizawa to provide for the management system and method of a work site, as taught in Hiranaka, to operate the unmanned vehicle and the manned vehicle without decreasing an operation rate of the unmanned vehicle and the manned vehicle. (At Hiranaka ¶ [0004])
Regarding claim 16, Aizawa further teaches:
further comprising, for a requester operating mode: (The monitor function switch 72 is provided, for example, near the operator seat in the cabin 10 and is an operation unit used by an operator and the like for turning on/off the monitor function by the surrounding monitoring apparatus 150. That is, the monitor function switch 72 is an operation unit for enabling or disabling the functions of the alarm output and the operation limitation of the excavator 100 executed based on the detection of a monitor target. For example, when the monitor function is enabled in response to an operation by an operator and the like with respect to the monitor function switch 72, the functions of the display control unit 3011, the detecting unit 3012, the tracking unit 3013, the alarm output unit 3014, and the operation limiting unit 3015, which will be described later, are enabled. On the other hand, for example, when the monitor function is disabled in response to an operation by an operator and the like with respect to the monitor function switch 72, all functions of the display control unit 3011 (at least the functional portion relating to the monitor function), the detecting unit 3012, the tracking unit 3013, the alarm output unit 3014, and the operation limiting unit 3015 become disabled – See at least ¶ [0332]-[0334])
receive, by the processing circuitry, a restriction request from a requester; (The operation limiting unit 304C limits the operation of an operation element of the excavator 100 when a monitor target is detected in the monitor area by the detecting unit 302C. At this time, the operation element to be the target of the operation limitation includes some of or all of the lower traveling body 1, the upper turning body 3, the boom 4, the arm 5, and the bucket 6. For example, the operation limiting unit 304 C causes the gate lock valve 54 to switch the pilot line into a non-communication state by transmitting an instruction signal (ON signal) to the gate lock valve 54 – See at least ¶ [0128]; Examiner notes that the operation limits are engaged in response to a notification from the detecting unit that a target is detected, i.e., a restriction request.)
set, by the processing circuitry, the at least one automated vehicle in the restricted mode based on said restriction request, (Accordingly, the hydraulic oil (pilot pressure) is not supplied from the pilot pump (not illustrated) to an operation apparatus (not illustrated) which operates the operation element of the excavator 100, so that the operation element of the excavator 100 is prevented from operating even if an operator inputs an operation to the operation apparatus – See at least ¶ [0128])
receive, by the processing circuitry, a resume request from the requester; (The operation limiting unit 304C cancels the operation limitation of the excavator 100 when the monitor target detected by the detecting unit 302C is no longer detected or when the above-described cancel operation is performed after the start of the operation limitation of the excavator 100 – See at least ¶ [0141]; Examiner notes that the system allows resume of non-limited operation when a target leaves the area, i.e., in response to a signal from the detecting unit 302c or when an operator requests a cancelation. Both of which are a “resume request”.)
set, by the processing circuitry, the at least one automated vehicle in a non-restricted mode based on the resume request, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: ((The operation limiting unit 304C cancels the operation limitation of the excavator 100 when the monitor target detected by the detecting unit 302C is no longer detected or when the above-described cancel operation is performed after the start of the operation limitation of the excavator 100 – See at least ¶ [0141]))
determine that the computer system is to operate in the requester operating mode or the site operating mode. (For example, when the monitor function is enabled in response to an operation by an operator and the like with respect to the monitor function switch 72, the functions of the display control unit 3011, the detecting unit 3012, the tracking unit 3013, the alarm output unit 3014, and the operation limiting unit 3015, which will be described later, are enabled. On the other hand, for example, when the monitor function is disabled in response to an operation by an operator and the like with respect to the monitor function switch 72, all functions of the display control unit 3011 (at least the functional portion relating to the monitor function), the detecting unit 3012, the tracking unit 3013, the alarm output unit 3014, and the operation limiting unit 3015 become disabled – See at least ¶ [0332]-[0334])
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHASE L COOLEY whose telephone number is (303)297-4355. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7-5MT.
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.
/CHASE L COOLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights