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
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on April 10, 2026. Claims 1, 5, and 6 have been amended. Claims 1-6 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Amendments
In response to Applicant's Amendments dated April 10, 2026, Examiner withdraws the previous title objection and the previous grounds of prior art rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection made.
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 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 20060129276 (hereinafter, "Watabe"; previously of record), in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20180259966 (hereinafter, "Long"; newly of record), and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20200097006 (hereinafter, "Liu"; previously of record).
Regarding claim 1, Watabe discloses a mobile apparatus comprising:
circuitry configured to estimate a self-position of the mobile apparatus based on a parameter by using an environmental map… (“The map data storage unit 81 stores map data on the active area where the robot R moves around... The map data contains position data and mark-formed region data... The map data storage unit 81 outputs the stored map data to the switch determination unit 82 and self-location calculation unit 85” (para 0062)),
However, Watabe does not explicitly teach
… embedded with waypoint information including target positions along a travel route of the mobile apparatus and a parameter for self-position estimation associated with each of the target positions,
acquire the parameter for self-position estimation from the environmental map at a location corresponding to the waypoint information, and
dynamically switch the parameter for self-position estimation in accordance with a travelling environment at the target positions during operation.
Long, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
… embedded with waypoint information including target positions along a travel route of the mobile apparatus and a parameter for self-position estimation associated with each of the target positions (“map data 151 includes a glide path 146 associated with safe zone 110b. Glide path 146 include waypoints 147... waypoint 147, 148 may also be associated with a geographic location on roadway 104... vehicle controller 154 may retrieve motion characteristics... that represent a portion of logic... to perform a pre-calculated routine that guides the vehicle into safe zone 110b via glide path 146”” (para 0033)),
acquire the parameter for self-position estimation from the environmental map at a location corresponding to the waypoint information (“map data 151 includes a glide path 146 associated with safe zone 110b. Glide path 146 include waypoints 147... waypoint 147, 148 may also be associated with a geographic location on roadway 104... vehicle controller 154 may retrieve motion characteristics... that represent a portion of logic... to perform a pre-calculated routine that guides the vehicle into safe zone 110b via glide path 146”” (para 0033)),
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Watabe with the teachings of Long in order to identify and adapt to performs a pre-calculated recovery action based on motion characteristics of an autonomous vehicle at a certain point; see Long at least at [0033], and
Liu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
dynamically switch the parameter for self-position estimation in accordance with a travelling environment at the target positions during operation (“the processor of the robotic device may employ localization and mapping techniques, such as simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), using sensor data that is weighted based on its reliability... extract semantic information about situations that negatively affect performance…” (para 0019) and “adjust weight factor of sensor(s) at any identified region(s) and/or time(s) of low performance” (para 0004)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Watabe with the teachings of Liu in order to identify and adapt to temporal and spatial patterns in robotic device surroundings; see Liu at least at [0019].
Regarding claim 5, Watabe discloses a control method for a mobile apparatus, comprising:
estimating a self-position of the mobile apparatus based on a parameter by utilizing an environmental map… (“The map data storage unit 81 stores map data on the active area where the robot R moves around... The map data contains position data and mark-formed region data... The map data storage unit 81 outputs the stored map data to the switch determination unit 82 and self-location calculation unit 85” (para 0062)),
However, Watabe does not explicitly teach
… embedded with waypoint information including target positions along a travel route of the mobile apparatus and a parameter for self-position estimation associated with each of the target positions;
acquiring the parameter for self-position estimation from the environmental map at a location corresponding to the waypoint information; and
dynamically switching the parameter for self-position estimation in accordance with a travelling environment at the target positions during operation.
Long, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
… embedded with waypoint information including target positions along a travel route of the mobile apparatus and a parameter for self-position estimation associated with each of the target positions (“map data 151 includes a glide path 146 associated with safe zone 110b. Glide path 146 include waypoints 147... waypoint 147, 148 may also be associated with a geographic location on roadway 104... vehicle controller 154 may retrieve motion characteristics... that represent a portion of logic... to perform a pre-calculated routine that guides the vehicle into safe zone 110b via glide path 146”” (para 0033));
acquiring the parameter for self-position estimation from the environmental map at a location corresponding to the waypoint information (“map data 151 includes a glide path 146 associated with safe zone 110b. Glide path 146 include waypoints 147... waypoint 147, 148 may also be associated with a geographic location on roadway 104... vehicle controller 154 may retrieve motion characteristics... that represent a portion of logic... to perform a pre-calculated routine that guides the vehicle into safe zone 110b via glide path 146”” (para 0033));
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Watabe with the teachings of Long in order to identify and adapt to performs a pre-calculated recovery action based on motion characteristics of an autonomous vehicle at a certain point; see Long at least at [0033], and
Liu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
dynamically switching the parameter for self-position estimation in accordance with a travelling environment at the target positions during operation (“the processor of the robotic device may employ localization and mapping techniques, such as simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), using sensor data that is weighted based on its reliability... extract semantic information about situations that negatively affect performance…” (para 0019) and “adjust weight factor of sensor(s) at any identified region(s) and/or time(s) of low performance” (para 0004)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Watabe with the teachings of Liu in order to identify and adapt to temporal and spatial patterns in robotic device surroundings; see Liu at least at [0019].
Regarding claim 6, Watabe discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having embodied thereon a program, which when executed by a computer causes the computer to execute a control method for a mobile apparatus, the control method comprising:
estimating a self-position of the mobile apparatus based on a parameter by utilizing an environmental map… (“The map data storage unit 81 stores map data on the active area where the robot R moves around... The map data contains position data and mark-formed region data... The map data storage unit 81 outputs the stored map data to the switch determination unit 82 and self-location calculation unit 85” (para 0062)),
However, Watabe does not explicitly teach
… embedded with waypoint information including target positions along a travel route of the mobile apparatus and a parameter for self-position estimation associated with each of the target positions;
acquiring the parameter for self-position estimation from the environmental map at a location corresponding to the waypoint information; and
dynamically switching the parameter for self-position estimation in accordance with a travelling environment at the target positions during operation.
Long, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
… embedded with waypoint information including target positions along a travel route of the mobile apparatus and a parameter for self-position estimation associated with each of the target positions (“map data 151 includes a glide path 146 associated with safe zone 110b. Glide path 146 include waypoints 147... waypoint 147, 148 may also be associated with a geographic location on roadway 104... vehicle controller 154 may retrieve motion characteristics... that represent a portion of logic... to perform a pre-calculated routine that guides the vehicle into safe zone 110b via glide path 146”” (para 0033));
acquiring the parameter for self-position estimation from the environmental map at a location corresponding to the waypoint information (“map data 151 includes a glide path 146 associated with safe zone 110b. Glide path 146 include waypoints 147... waypoint 147, 148 may also be associated with a geographic location on roadway 104... vehicle controller 154 may retrieve motion characteristics... that represent a portion of logic... to perform a pre-calculated routine that guides the vehicle into safe zone 110b via glide path 146”” (para 0033));
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Watabe with the teachings of Long in order to identify and adapt to performs a pre-calculated recovery action based on motion characteristics of an autonomous vehicle at a certain point; see Long at least at [0033], and
Liu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
dynamically switching the parameter for self-position estimation in accordance with a travelling environment at the target positions during operation (“the processor of the robotic device may employ localization and mapping techniques, such as simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), using sensor data that is weighted based on its reliability... extract semantic information about situations that negatively affect performance…” (para 0019) and “adjust weight factor of sensor(s) at any identified region(s) and/or time(s) of low performance” (para 0004)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Watabe with the teachings of Liu in order to identify and adapt to temporal and spatial patterns in robotic device surroundings; see Liu at least at [0019].
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 20060129276 (hereinafter, "Watabe"; previously of record), in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20180259966 (hereinafter, "Long"; newly of record), and in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20200097006 (hereinafter, "Liu"; previously of record) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of U.S. Pat. No. 11199853 (hereinafter, "Afrouzi"; previously of record).
Regarding claim 2, Watabe discloses the mobile apparatus according to claim 1. However, Watabe does not explicitly teach wherein the parameter for self-position estimation corresponds to at least one of a sensor used for self-position estimation, a covariance value in an extended Kalman filter for fusing a plurality of methods for self-position estimation, or a parameter corresponding to a setting value in each respective method.
Afrouzi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the parameter for self-position estimation corresponds to at least one of a sensor used for self-position estimation, a covariance value in an extended Kalman filter for fusing a plurality of methods for self-position estimation, or a parameter corresponding to a setting value in each respective method (“IMU measurements in a multi-channel stream indicative of acceleration along three or six axes may be integrated over time to infer a change in pose of the VMP robot, e.g., with a Kalman filter” (Col. 111, lines 35-38)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Watabe with the teachings of Afrouzi in order to integrate measurements over time; see Afrouzi at least at [Col. 111, lines 35-38].
Regarding claim 3, Watabe discloses the mobile apparatus according to claim 2. However, Watabe does not explicitly teach wherein the parameter for self-position estimation corresponds to self-position estimation using at least one of an IMU, wheel odometry, visual odometry, SLAM, or GPS.
Liu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the parameter for self-position estimation corresponds to self-position estimation using at least one of an IMU, wheel odometry, visual odometry, SLAM, or GPS ((Fig. 4, #402) and “As described, the sensor(s) 402 may also include at least one motion feedback sensor, such as a wheel encoder, pressure sensor, or other collision or contact-based sensor. Further, the sensor(s) 402 may include at least one image sensor, such as a visual camera, an infrared sensor, a sonar detector, etc” (para 0070)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Watabe with the teachings of Liu in order to enable the system to perform localization, map generation, and path planning for SLAM processes on the robotic device; see Liu at least at [0070].
Regarding claim 4, Watabe discloses the mobile apparatus according to claim 1. However, Watabe does not explicitly teach wherein the circuitry is further configured to monitor a state of a sensor used for self-position estimation, and
select a route based on parameters for self-position estimation in different routes and sensor states corresponding to each parameter for self-position estimation.
Afrouzi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the circuitry is further configured to monitor a state of a sensor used for self-position estimation (“For example, actuators may be encouraged to find better sources of information, such as robots with better sensors or ideally positioned sensors, and observers may be encouraged to find actuators that have better use of their information. In some embodiments, the processor uses a regret analysis when determining exploration or exploitation. For example, the processor may determine a regret function” (Col. 179, lines 42-49)), and
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Watabe with the teachings of Afrouzi in order to find better sources of information; see Afrouzi at least at [Col. 179, lines 42-49].
select a route based on parameters for self-position estimation in different routes and sensor states corresponding to each parameter for self-position estimation (“In some embodiments, the control system iterates through different evolved routes until a route with a cost below a predetermined threshold is found or for a predetermined amount of time. In some embodiments, the control system randomly chooses a route with higher cost to avoid getting stuck in a local minimum” (Col. 205, lines 45-50)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Watabe with the teachings of Afrouzi in order to find a route with a cost below a predetermined threshold; see Afrouzi at least at [Col. 205, lines 45-50].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ALHARBI whose telephone number is (313)446-6621. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6:30pm.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. 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.
/ADAM M ALHARBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights