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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “an environment detection device” and “a simulation device” in claim 1. According to the instant specification, e.g., paragraphs [0040], [0053]-[0054], and Fig. 2 (element 79), “an environment detection device” has been interpreted as a combination of different hardware (such as different sensors, receivers, cameras) to acquire different information regarding the work site and the working vehicle. Also, according to paragraphs [0072] and [0113] of the instant specification and drawings (e.g. Fig. 8), “a simulation device” is part of the controller and therefore has been interpreted as being composed of software components or hardware.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-7, and 9-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu, WO 2021241716 A1, hereinafter “Wu”.
Regarding claim 1, Wu teaches:
A work support system for an excavator ([0001], [0006]),
comprising: the excavator; an environment detection device configured to detect environment information of a work site of the excavator ([0022], “spatial recognition device C1 is an imaging device such as…”, [0066], “the surrounding image is generated based on the image captured by the imaging device, which acts as the spatial recognition device C1. [] generate a first virtual viewpoint image as a surrounding image based on an image captured by at least one of the rear camera C1B, front camera C1F, left camera C1L, and right camera C1R. ”, [0068], [0098])
a simulation device configured to acquire the environment information detected by the environment detection device during a motion of the excavator, and to generate a three-dimensional virtual space model of the work site ([0094], “e operation simulator 54 constructs a virtual work site, which is a virtual model of the work site, based on environmental information”, [0095], “a three-dimensional virtual space (a three-dimensional model) that reproduces the current terrain of an actual work site”)
Regarding claim 2, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 1, wherein the environment detection device acquires the environment information at a predetermined timing during the motion of the excavator ([00151], “the controller 50 receives the output of the space recognition device C1 before the start of construction or at predetermined time during construction.”).
Regarding claim 5, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 4, wherein the environment information includes earth and sand information estimated from the excavation motion information (at least [00135], “determines that the earth and sand are clayey or sandy than the expected earth and sand based on the outputs of various sensors mounted on the excavator”, [00136], [00148], [00150])
Regarding claim 6, The work support system for the excavator according to claim 1, wherein the simulation device provide the excavator with simulation motion information simulated by a virtual excavator in the three-dimensional virtual space model reproduced by the simulation device (__Examiner’s Note: according to paragraph [0073] of the present specification, simulation motion information refers to excavation trajectories for moving the excavation attachment of the virtual excavator with respect to the excavation object (i.e. earth and sand information)__, See Wu at least paragraphs [00113]-[00114] and Fig. 7, __simulation results provides information about excavation work along different trajectories SP1 or SP3__).
Regarding claim 7, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 6, wherein the excavator is controlled at the work site based on the simulation motion information (__according to the whole Wu’s disclosure, the excavator is controlled based on the simulation motion information,__ See at least, e.g. Abstract, [0024], [0052], [0094], [00115], “the excavation work performed at the actual work site based on the result of the simulation”, [00136], [00143]-[00145], “the controller 50 may be configured so that the operation command can be changed based on the result of the simulation”, [00152]).
Regarding claim 9, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 6, wherein the simulation device generates the simulation motion information for avoiding a person, upon recognizing that the person is present around the excavator based on the environment information ([0024]).
Regarding claim 10, Wu teaches The work support system for the excavator according to claim 1, further comprising: a remote operation room arranged at a location away from the excavator (at least , [0036], “the outside such as the remote control room”, [0057]-[0060]) wherein the simulation device simulates a motion of a virtual excavator in the three-dimensional virtual space model reproduced by the simulation device, based on an operation instruction of an operation device of the remote operation room (Page 15, [0095], Page 24, [00132], “the motion simulator 54 may reproduce the state of the virtual construction machine (virtual excavator) in the virtual work site”).
Regarding claim 11, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 1, wherein the simulation device is provided in a controller configured to control the excavator or in a management apparatus capable of communicating with the excavator, the management apparatus being outside the excavator ([0082], “the controller 50 has a determination unit 51, an operation prediction unit 52, an operation intervention unit 53, and an operation simulator”, [0062], “the controller 50 and the communication device T3 as management devices installed in the information center 200”, [0094], “remote control room”).
Regarding claim 12, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 1, wherein the environment information is stored in the simulation device before the motion of the excavator is performed ([0086], “the construction topography information (topography data) stored in advance in the non-volatile storage medium”), and the simulation device generates the three-dimensional virtual space model based on the stored environment information, before the motion of the excavator is performed ([0086], [0095], [0129], [00132])
Regarding claim 13, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 1,
wherein the simulation device extracts, as object information, an object included in the environment information and a position of the object ([0023], [0024], at least: “detect an object existing around the excavator 100.” “identify at least one of the type, position, shape, and the like of the object.”,) and
arranges the extracted object information in the three- dimensional virtual space model ([0024], at least: “determines that a person is within a predetermined distance from the excavator 100 before the actuator operates, the controller 30 cannot operate the actuator even if the operator operates the operation lever.”, or “when it is determined that a person exists within a predetermined distance from the excavator 100 when the operator is operating the operation lever, the controller 30 operates the actuator regardless of the operation content of the operator”, [0095], “the excavator 100 acquires information (position, size, tree type, etc.) of the fallen tree generated at the actual work site [] reflects the latest information of the received actual work site []operate the virtual excavator [] in consideration of the fallen tree.” __Note: the cited parts of Wu, reads on arranging the extracted object information in the three-dimensional virtual model)
Regarding claim 14, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 13, wherein the simulation device adds additional information corresponding to the object information, to the object information arranged in the three- dimensional virtual space model ([00135]-[0136], [0148]-[0150])__Note: “additional information” as recited in the claim, is interpreted according to paragraphs e.g. [0052]-[0057], for example additional information is earth and sand information__)
Regarding claim 15, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 14, wherein the object information includes at least one of information of a shape or a position of the excavator ([0020]), [0039], “data regarding the position of the excavator”, [0072], “position and orientation of the excavator”, [0096])
Regarding claim 16, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 15, wherein the additional information corresponding to the information of the shape or the position of the excavator includes at least one of a posture, an identification number, a type, a working time, or an attachment state of the excavator ([0083], “position, posture, and operation content of the excavator”, [0096]).
Regarding claim 17, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 15, wherein the additional information corresponding to the information of the shape or the position of the excavation object includes at least one of a sediment accumulation amount, a weight, a density, a hardness, or soil quality of the excavation object ([00136], [0095], “the ground characteristics (hardness, density, water content rate, etc.) of the ground and slopes of the virtual work site are also reproduced so as to match the ground characteristics of the actual work site.”).
Regarding claim 18, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 15, wherein the additional information corresponding to the information of the shape or the position of the discharge object includes at least one of a posture of the discharge object; an identification number; a type; a size of a loading platform; a state of the loading platform; a working time; or a weight, a volume, or a density of the discharge object ([00698], “the depth of the loading platform of the dump truck located in front of the excavator 100, the height of the embankment on the ground, or the depth of the hole on the ground. Etc. can be grasped more accurately. ”, __Note: discharge object is a dump truck__).
Regarding claim 19, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 1, wherein the environment detection device includes a space recognition device configured to recognize topographic information of the work site and object information of an object at the work site, and the space recognition device is arranged in the excavator or at a location away from the excavator ([0018], [0022], [0024], [0062]-[0063]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claims 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Wu, or in alternative rejections, claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Kim et al., US20210148085A1, hereinafter “Kim”.
Regarding claim 3, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 1, wherein the environment information includes motion information acquired during the motion of the excavator ([0095], [0097], [00106]-[00107], [0131], [00135]__Note: according to the motion simulator in Wu disclosure, it is obvious that the motion information is acquired during the motion of the excavator).
In an event Wu doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the environment information includes motion information acquired during the motion of the excavator, Kim more explicitly teaches wherein the environment information includes motion information acquired during the motion of the excavator (least [0067], “The work information may include command information on a moving path and work path of the excavator.”, [0073], __ Note: according to paragraph [0095] of the instant specification, the “motion information” has been interpreted as motion information of the excavator__).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the construction assisting system as taught by Wu with providing motion information during the motion of the excavator as implicitly suggested in Wu’s disclosure and also as taught more explicitly by Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving the reliability and the safety of the excavation work of the excavator
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Wu, or in alternative rejection, claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Kim further in view of Hashimoto et al., US 20240183131 A1, hereinafter “Hashimoto”.
Regarding claim 4, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 3, wherein the motion information includes excavation motion information acquired in association with an excavation motion of the excavator (__Examiner’s Note: As disclosed in paragraph [0092] of the specification “excavation motion information” has been interpreted as any information including the operation of the space recognition device, the orientation detection device, the positioning device and various sensors, or the operation device; communication information from the external space recognition device and the dump truck) at a predetermined timing.__ See Wu at least [0094], “various operations such as excavation work by the excavator 100 [] based on environmental information [that] is information relating to the work environment and includes, for example, information output by at least one of the spatial recognition device C1, spatial recognition device C3, positioning device 18, and attitude detection sensor.”, [0095], “position and orientation of the excavator”, [0096]).
Examiner’s Note: according to the limitation recited in claim 5 (see mapping of claim 5) and the specification of the present application, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the examiner, term “excavation motion information” can also be interpreted as information from load sensor, pressure sensor or like while performing excavation. As addressed in previous paragraph of the present office action, the only statement regarding the term “excavation motion information” in the specification of the instant application, is disclosed in paragraph [0092] of the specification which include information from the space recognition center, orientation detection device, positioning device and such. Therefore, the term as broadly recited can be interpreted as any information received from sensors or like while the excavator is performing the excavation work.
Therefore, for the purpose of compact prosecution and under the interpretation as stated in paragraph 29 of the present office action, in the event that Wu doesn’t explicitly teaches wherein the motion information includes excavation motion information acquired in association with an excavation motion of the excavator, Hashimoto teaches wherein the motion information includes excavation motion information acquired in association with an excavation motion of the excavator (See Hashimoto, [0007], “a drive load information acquisition unit that acquires drive load information that is information regarding a load received by the drive unit as the bucket excavates the ground surface, a machine load calculator that calculates a machine load that is a load received by the bucket from earth and sand from the orientation information acquired by the orientation information acquisition unit and the drive load information acquired by the drive load information acquisition unit as the bucket excavates the ground surface, a soil pressure load calculator that calculates a soil pressure load that is a load applied to the bucket by a soil mass, based on a soil pressure theory from a shape of the soil mass constituted by a soil dammed by the bucket, the orientation information acquired by the orientation information acquisition unit, a shape of the bucket, a density of the soil, and a wall surface frictional angle between the soil and the bucket as the bucket excavates the ground surface, and a soil quality estimator that estimates a soil quality of the soil at a work site based on the machine load calculated by the machine load calculator and the soil pressure load calculated by the soil pressure load calculator.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the construction assisting system as taught by Wu in view of Kim, with providing excavation motion information is association with the exaction motion of the excavator as disclosed in Wu’s disclosure and also as taught more explicitly by Hashimoto, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving the accuracy and reliability of the excavation work of the excavator.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Wu, or in alternative rejections, claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Hashimoto, or in alternative, in view of Kim.
Regarding claim 8, Wu teaches the work support system for the excavator according to claim 6, wherein the simulation device generates a plurality of trajectories of the virtual excavator with different conditions with respect to an excavation motion or an earth and sand discharging motion, and provides, as the simulation motion information, an optimum trajectory among the plurality of trajectories based on a result of simulating the plurality of trajectories ([00134], “the motion simulator 54 can find the optimum motion command by executing the simulation of the motion of the excavator 100 according to the plurality of new motion commands.”)
Also, for the purpose of compact prosecution, Hashimoto or, in alternative rejection Kim more explicitly teaches wherein the simulation device generates a plurality of trajectories of the virtual excavator with different conditions with respect to an excavation motion or an earth and sand discharging motion, and provides, as the simulation motion information, an optimum trajectory among the plurality of trajectories based on a result of simulating the plurality of trajectories (See Hashimoto, [0057], “The output characteristic setting unit 506 sets (adjusts) an output characteristic of the drive unit 71 based on the soil quality information estimated by the soil quality estimator 505, and inputs a command signal corresponding to the characteristic to the drive unit 71.”, in alternative See Kim et al., US20210148085A1, [0056], “the control device 200 may calculate an optimal excavation trajectory for an autonomous excavator and output a pressure command signal as a control signal for operating the working device 60 according to the calculated excavation trajectory to the spool displacement adjusting valve.”, [0073], [0085], Fig. 9, [0085]-[0091]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the simulation method used in construction assisting system as taught by Wu with generating a plurality of trajectories and an optimum trajectory among the plurality of trajectories of the virtual excavator based on an excavation motion or an earth and sand discharging motion, as suggested in Wu’s disclosure and also as taught more explicitly by Hashimoto, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving the accuracy and reliability of the excavation work of the excavator by performing the excavation work in an optimum/best possible trajectory.
Documents Considered but not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Vik, US 20080208415 A1, discloses a method of determining operation characteristics of a working machine using virtual imaging.
Kano et al., US 20180374168 A1, discloses a simulation system capable of improving productivity in a construction site.
Flir et al., US 20170293290 A1, discloses a system for digital support of a work process of a work machine.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAJAR HASSANIARDEKANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1448. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8 am-5 pm ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Erin Piateski can be reached at 5712707429. 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.
/H.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/Erin M Piateski/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights