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
In the communication filed on 07/09/2026, claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 3-4, 10-11, 13, and 16-19 are amended. Claim 21 is new. Claim 2 is presently cancelled.
The amended independent claim 1 incorporated subject matter from original claim 2.
Response to Arguments
The prior objections to the Drawings are withdrawn due to the amendments.
For clarity of record, a copy of the replacement drawings (filed 07/09/2026) is attached with annotations to indicate the replacement drawings are approved.
The prior objections to the Specification are withdrawn due to the amendments.
For clarity of record, a copy of the specification amendments (filed 07/09/2026) is attached with annotations to indicate the specification amendments are okay to enter.
The prior rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn due to the amendments.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejections of amended independent claims 1, 10, and 16 are persuasive but moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7-8 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 7 and 20 each recite “the one of the plurality of positioning beacons”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term in the claim language. For examination purposes, this is interpreted to be any of the “first positioning beacon”, the “second positioning beacon”, or the “third positioning beacon”.
Claim 16 recites “A charging base for a robot, comprising: …”. This language is indefinite as to whether the “charging base” or the “robot” is claimed to be comprising the features of the claim body. For examination purposes, it is interpreted that the “charging base” is comprising the features.
Claims 8 and 17-19 is further rejected for their dependency on other rejected claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, He discloses a robot charging system (combo of “wireless charging station 100” and “self-moving device 200”; ¶ [208]: “100 includes a bottom plate 101 laid flat on a ground”; Fig), comprising the following features.
He further discloses a charging base (“wireless charging station 100”, including “bottom plate 101”; Figs. 1-3, 4A-4B, 5-11, 13) comprising a base housing (housing of “101”).
He further discloses a robot (“self-moving device 200”; Figs. 1, 4A-4B, 8-13; ¶ [207]: “200 may be an automatic or semi-automatic machine such as an intelligent lawn mower, an intelligent sweeper, an intelligent snow sweeper, an intelligent sprinkler, or an intelligent camera robot”) comprising a robot body (“housing 201”; Fig. 12; ¶ [234]) and a sensor (“inductor 23”, used to sense when the robot “reaches the predetermined charging position” per ¶ [274]; Fig. 35 shows “23” arranged on the robot body “201”) arranged on the robot body (201).
PNG
media_image1.png
885
1146
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Though He discloses a charging base comprising a base housing, He does not disclose that the charging base also comprises “a positioning coil assembly accommodated in the base housing”.
He further does not disclose “the positioning coil assembly comprises a plurality of positioning beacons and an in-position detection coil, the plurality of positioning beacons comprise a first positioning beacon, a second positioning beacon, and a third positioning beacon that are arranged at intervals along a first straight line direction with the second positioning beacon located between the first positioning beacon and the third positioning beacon, the second positioning beacon and the in-position detection coil are arranged along a second straight line direction that is perpendicular to the first straight line direction, and the sensor is configured to detect magnetic induction intensity changes from the positioning coil assembly to determine a deviation of the robot relative to the second straight line direction”.
Seong teaches a charging base (“charging station 20” with “power transmission pad 21”; Fig. 3) comprising a base housing (structure of “21”) and a positioning coil assembly (combo of “LF antennas” shown in Figs. 10A-10B, 14A; referred to as “auxiliary coils” in ¶ [132, 139]) accommodated in the base housing (structure of “21”).
Seong teaches the positioning coil assembly (combo of “LF antennas” shown in Figs. 10A-10B, 14A) comprises a plurality of positioning beacons (plurality of “low frequency transmitting antennas (LFA)”, including “LFA A”, “LFA B”, and “LFA C”; Figs. 10A, 14A) and an in-position detection coil (“LFA” in the location labeled in the annotated Fig. 10A, included infra).
PNG
media_image2.png
921
1075
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Seong further teaches (see annotated Fig. 14A) the plurality of positioning beacons (LFA) comprise a first positioning beacon (“LFA C”), a second positioning beacon (“LFA A”), and a third positioning beacon (“LFA B”) that are arranged at intervals along (see note 1-1, included infra) a first straight line direction (direction “Y”, labeled in Fig. 14A).
NOTE 1-1: The claim language “arranged … along” does not necessarily limit the positions to be in a line, but merely that they are nearby a line; Fig. 14A shows that when viewed from above, each of the positioning beacons is spaced along the “Y” direction.
Seong further teaches the second positioning beacon (“LFA A”) located between the first positioning beacon (“LFA C”) and the third positioning beacon (“LFA B”).
PNG
media_image3.png
721
1167
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Seong further teaches the second positioning beacon (“LFA A”) and the in-position detection coil (see annotated Fig. 10A) are arranged along a second straight line direction (direction “X”, labeled in Fig. 14A) that is perpendicular to the first straight line direction (direction “Y”).
Seong further teaches the sensor (combo of “LFA” on the vehicle-side; Fig. 14A shows “LFA α”, “LFA β”, & “LFA γ”; ¶ [161]: “LF receiving antennas”; ¶ [174]: “the LF receiving antennas of the transmission coil receive all values of magnetic fields emitted by the transmitter”) is configured to detect magnetic induction intensity changes (Figs. 9A-9C depict the magnetic fields detected; ¶ [147-149]) from the positioning coil assembly (combo of “LF antennas” shown in Figs. 10A-10B, 14A) to determine a deviation (“Δy”; Fig. 3; ¶ [132]: “distance is measured by sensing the weak magnetic fields induced in the auxiliary coils”; ¶ [178]: “magnetic field analysis and distance measurement are performed via the LF receiving antennas of the transmission coil and the LF transmitters of the reception coil”) of the vehicle (“10”, analogous to the robot) relative to the second straight line direction (direction “Y”).
PNG
media_image4.png
923
1369
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Seong further teaches this positioning coil assembly improves charging efficiency by improving positional alignment of the wireless power transfer coils (¶ [22, 118-119, 122-123]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the robot charging system disclosed by He to incorporate a positioning coil assembly in the charging base such that the sensor can determine a position deviation from detecting magnetic induction intensity changes, as taught by Seong, to improve charging efficiency by improving the fine positional alignment of the wireless power transfer coils between the rob and the charging base.
He’s Fig. 2 is included infra with annotations to indicate the modifications to the charging base per the teachings of Seong.
PNG
media_image5.png
859
1419
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, the combo of He & Seong teaches the robot charging system of claim 1.
The combo of He & Seong further teaches (see the annotated He Fig. 2, included supra in the claim 1 section) the charging base (He’s “101”, modified to incorporate a positioning coil assembly per teachings of Seong) comprises a transmitting coil (He: “resonant coil transmitting component 103”; Seong equivalent: “primary coil”) arranged along the second straight line direction (He: “Front” / “Rear”; Seong equivalent: direction “X”) between the second positioning beacon (from Seong: “LFA A”, incorporated into He’s charging base as shown in the annotated He Fig. 3) and the in-position detection coil (from Seong, incorporated into He’s charging base as shown in the annotated He Fig. 3).
He further discloses the robot (200) comprises an electric energy receiving device (“resonant coil receiving component 205”; Fig. 9) configured to couple with the transmitting coil (103) for charging (¶ [234]: “electromagnetic signal transmitted by the resonant coil transmitting component 103 is received by using the resonant coil receiving component 205, to supply power to the power supply device”) the robot (200).
Regarding Claim 7, the combo of He & Seong teaches the robot charging system of claim 1.
The combo of He & Seong further teaches (see Seong’s Fig. 14A, included supra with annotations; Fig. 14A shows that when viewed in the “Y” direction, the “LFA A” is wider than each of the “LFA B” and “LFA C”) a width of the one of the plurality of positioning beacons (Seong’s second positioning beacon “LFA A”) arranged along the second straight line direction (He: “Front” / “Rear”; Seong equivalent: direction “X”) is greater than a width of other ones of the plurality of positioning beacons (Seong’s first positioning beacon “LFA C” and third positioning beacon “LFA B”) in the first straight line direction (He: “Right” / “Left”; Seong equivalent: direction “Y”).
Regarding Claim 8, the combo of He & Seong teaches the robot charging system of claim 7.
He further discloses the robot (200) comprises a working device (¶ [234]: “working device 203, mounted on the housing 201”) connected to the robot body (201)
He further discloses the working device (203) is a mowing device (¶ [234]: “where an example of an intelligent lawn mower is used, and the working device 203 is a cutting device configured to cut grass in a working region”).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1) and Ebrahimi Afrouzi (US 10,698,411 B1; hereinafter “Ebra”), and as evidenced by Wu (US 2017/0344014 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, the combo of He & Seong teaches the robot charging system of claim 1.
The combo of He & Seong teaches the first positioning beacon (from Seong: “LFA C”), the second positioning beacon (from Seong: “LFA A”), and the third positioning beacon (from Seong: “LFA B”) are configured to generate magnetic fields (Seong ¶ [119]: “The LF signal is a digitally modulated magnetic field that operates in a low frequency ITU radio band”).
The combo of He & Seong teaches the robot (He’s “200”, modified per teachings of Seong) is configured to identify the deviation (from Seong: identify deviation “Δy”; Seong ¶ [178]: “magnetic field analysis and distance measurement”).
Though the combo of He & Seong teaches the first positioning beacon, the second positioning beacon, and the third positioning beacon are configured to generate magnetic fields, He does not disclose these magnetic fields, i.e. the beacon signals, as “having different frequencies”.
Though the combo of He & Seong teaches the robot is configured to identify the deviation, He further does not disclose “the robot is configured to identify the deviation based on distinguishing the different frequencies detected by the sensor”.
Ebra teaches the plurality of positioning beacons (“left signal emitter 126” and “right signal emitter 128”; Fig. 2) are configured to generate beacon signals (col. 2, lines 21-22: “126 emits a first signal 134” and “128 emits a second signal 136”; analogous to magnetic fields per note 4-1, included infra) having different frequencies (col. 2, lines 23-24: “first and second signals are unique from each other so that they may be differentiated”; col. 2, lines 23-24: “signals may be differentiated by … a carrier frequency of a signal”).
NOTE 4-1: Though the beacon signals taught by Ebra are not magnetic fields, they are analogous because each is used as a beacon signal generated by one of three different positioning beacons to enable the robot to determine its position. The magnetic fields were established based on other prior art, as detailed supra. Thus, one of ordinary skill understands that Ebra’s teachings with respect to the beacon signals are applicable to the magnetic fields.
Ebra further teaches the robot (“mobile robot 100”; Figs. 1A, 3) is configured to identify the deviation based on distinguishing the different frequencies (identifies deviation of position into “range 200” or “range 202” by distinguishing received signal frequency to be associated with either beacon signal “134” or “136”) detected by the sensor (combo of “112” & “114”; Figs. 1A, 3).
Ebra further teaches using beacon signals of different frequencies to identify the deviation to clearly distinguish which side the robot is positioned on (col. 2, lines 16-36).
Wu provides evidence that Ebra’s approach of differentiating the beacon signals via timing, frequency, and/or modulation (¶ [28] discusses various techniques of differentiating the beacon signals) can be applied to the beacon signals (E1, E2, E3) generated by a set of three positioning beacons (121, 122, 123), such as those disclosed by the combo of He & Seong.
Wu further teaches using different beacon signals (E1, E2, E3) to improve efficiency of moving the robot and improve accuracy of docking the robot (¶ [8]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the magnetic fields generated by the three positioning beacons disclosed by the combo of He & Seong to be of different frequencies, as taught by Ebra, with evidence from Wu, to clearly distinguish which side of the second straight line direction that the robot is positioned on, which improves efficiency of moving the robot and improves accuracy of docking the robot.
Regarding Claim 5, the combo of He, Seong, & Ebra teaches the robot charging system of claim 4.
He does not disclose “the robot is configured to determine that the robot deviates to a first side of the second straight line direction when the sensor detects a frequency of the first positioning beacon, and to determine that the robot deviates to a second side of the second straight line direction when the sensor detects a frequency of the third positioning beacon”.
Ebra further teaches the robot (100) is configured to determine (Abstract: “Upon sensing the left emitter signals … and the right emitter …, the mobile robot is aligned with the recharge station”) that the robot deviates to a second side (“range 202”) of the second straight line direction (centerline between ranges “200” & “202”) when the sensor (112 & 114) detects a frequency (“” has unique frequency per col. 2, lines 23-24) of the third positioning beacon (“128”, which generates beacon signal “136”).
Ebra further teaches using beacon signals of different frequencies to identify the deviation to clearly distinguish which side the robot is positioned on (col. 2, lines 16-36).
Wu further teaches using different beacon signals (E1, E2, E3) to improve efficiency of moving the robot and improve accuracy of docking the robot (¶ [8]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the robot disclosed by the combo of He, Seong, & Ebra to determine whether the robot has deviated to either side of the second straight line direction based on detecting a frequency of the first or third positioning beacons, as further taught by Ebra, with evidence from Wu, to clearly distinguish which side of the second straight line direction that the robot is positioned on, which improves efficiency of moving the robot and improves accuracy of docking the robot.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1), Ebrahimi Afrouzi (US 10,698,411 B1; hereinafter “Ebra”), and Jeong et al. (US 2014/0156076 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, the combo of He, Seong, & Ebra teaches the robot charging system of claim 5.
He does not disclose “the robot is configured to correct the deviation by controlling the robot body to move backward by a first preset distance and then move laterally by a second preset distance”.
Jeong teaches (see annotated Fig. 7, included infra) the robot (“robot cleaner 10”; Figs. 1-2, 7) is configured to correct the deviation (deviation from desired positions by being too close to a wall, per step S140 of Fig. 5; corrected by moving along the detour route per step S300 of Figs. 5-6) by controlling the robot body (“main body 100”; Figs. 1-2, 7) to move backward (Fig. 6, step S310: “retreat by predetermined distance”) by a first preset distance (distance “Pd1” from “initial position a0” to “first position a1”; Fig. 7) and then move laterally by a second preset distance (distance “Pd2” from “a1” to “second position a2”; Fig. 7).
PNG
media_image6.png
861
1245
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Jeong further teaches this movement adjustment technique to return to the desired position and movement path (“detour route”) after detecting a deviation, which enables the robot to move properly after the correction (¶ [92-99]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the robot disclosed by the combo of He, Seong, & Ebra to move backward by a first preset distance and then move laterally by a second preset distance to return to the desired position and movement path after detecting a deviation, as taught by Jeong, , which enables the robot to move properly after the correction.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1) and Ärlig et al. (US 2022/0305658 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, the combo of He & Seong teaches the robot charging system of claim 1.
The combo of He & Seong teaches the robot (He’s “200”, modified per teachings of Seong) navigates using the positioning coil assembly (incorporated from Seong: combo of “LF antennas” shown in Figs. 10A-10B, 14A).
He does not disclose “a real time kinematic (RTK) positioning system configured to guide the robot to a charging positioning point located at a preset distance from the charging base before the robot navigates using the positioning coil assembly”.
Ärlig teaches (see annotated Fig. 5, included infra) a real time kinematic (RTK) positioning system (combo of “at least one satellite 330A” and “RTK beacon 330B”; Figs. 4-5; ¶ [56]) configured to guide the robot (“robotic lawnmower 200”; Figs. 4-5) to a charging positioning point (“hand-over point P”; Figs. 4-5) located at a preset distance (“d”; Figs. 4-5) from the charging base (“charging station 310”; Figs. 4-5) before (¶ [77]: “navigate the robotic work tool based on the satellite navigation device to a hand-over point; and to cause the robotic work tool to enter a service station utilizing deduced reckoning by propelling the robotic lawnmower a predefined distance”; ¶ [21]) the robot (200) navigates to reach the charging position (navigates from “P” to within/on “310”).
PNG
media_image7.png
870
1017
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Ärlig further teaches an RTK positioning system that guides the robot to a charging positioning point before navigating to the positioning coil assembly to enable accurate navigation and obstacle avoidance when the robot is located far away from the charging base (¶ [22, 57-58, 78]), which improves reliability of the robot’s ability to navigate to the charging base (¶ [9-10]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the robot charging system disclosed by the combo of He & Seong to incorporate an RTK positioning system that guides the robot to a charging positioning point before navigating to the positioning coil assembly, based on the teachings of Ärlig, to improve reliability of the robot’s ability to navigate to the charging base.
NOTE 9-1: Though not relied upon, the following references also include teachings relevant to the subject matter of claim 9.
Zhang et al. (US 2025/0160247 A1)
Hallin et al. (US 2023/0350421 A1)
Holgersson (US 2023/0086392 A1)
Xu et al. (US 2022/0197295 A1)
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1) and Shimizu et al. (US 2024/0396378 A1; hereinafter “Shi”).
Regarding Claim 21, the combo of He & Seong teaches the robot charging system of claim 1.
The combo of He & Seong teaches the robot (He’s “200”, modified per teachings of Seong) is configured to determine, based on an intensity of magnetic induction signals (Seong ¶ [178]: “magnetic field analysis and distance measurement are performed via the LF receiving antennas) detected by the sensor (Seong’s combo of “LF receiving antennas”) from the in-position detection coil (identified in Seong’s annotated Fig. 10A), that the robot (He’s “200”, modified per teachings of Seong) has reached a target charging position (alignment of He’s receiving coil “205” over the transmitting coil “103”) at which the sensor (Seong’s combo of “LF receiving antennas”) is positioned over the in-position detection coil (identified in Seong’s annotated Fig. 10A).
He does not disclose this determination is “based on an intensity of magnetic induction signals detected by the sensor from the in-position detection coil exceeding a threshold, that the robot has reached a target charging position at which the sensor is positioned over the in-position detection coil”.
Shi teaches to determine, based on an intensity of magnetic induction signals detected by the sensor (“power reception coil 31”, acting as a sensor to detect alignment of the “power transmission coil 18” and “position detection pattern coil 19”; Fig. 1) from the in-position detection coil exceeding a threshold (¶ [6]: “acquire magnitude of received power received by the terminal device; detect a position at which the power receiver of the terminal device is placed; set a threshold for determining whether to stop wireless charging in accordance with the received power and the position at which the power receiver is placed; and determine whether to continue or stop charging based on a comparison between the transmitted power and the threshold”), that the terminal device (analogous to the robot because each is the movable recipient of the charging power) has reached a target charging position (alignment of “18” and “19”) at which the sensor (31) is positioned over the in-position detection coil (“position detection pattern coil 19”; Fig. 1).
Shi further teaches comparing the detected magnetic induction signals with a threshold to ensure high efficiency of the magnetic coupling for wireless power transfer based on alignment of the sensor with the in-position detection coil (¶ [42]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the robot disclosed by the combo of He & Seong to detect whether the sensor has reached the in-position detection coil based on an intensity of the detected magnetic induction signals exceeding a threshold, as taught by Shi, to improve efficiency of the magnetic coupling for wireless power transfer by ensuring proper alignment.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1) and Brouwers et al. (US 2021/0228039 A1; hereinafter “Brou”).
Regarding Claim 10, He discloses a method (¶ [53]: “method for charging a self-moving device”) for controlling a robot (“self-moving device 200”; Figs. 1, 4A-4B, 8-13; ¶ [207]: “200 may be an automatic or semi-automatic machine such as an intelligent lawn mower, an intelligent sweeper, an intelligent snow sweeper, an intelligent sprinkler, or an intelligent camera robot”) to charge at a charging base (“bottom plate 101”; Figs. 1-3, 4A-4B, 5-11, 13).
He further discloses a first straight line direction (“Right” / “Left”; Fig. 2) and a second straight line direction (“Front” / “Right”; Fig. 2) perpendicular to the first straight line direction (“Right” / “Left”).
He further discloses the method comprising navigating (movement shown in Fig. 9) the robot (200) toward the charging base (101).
He does not disclose “the charging base comprising a positioning coil assembly having a first straight line direction and a second straight line direction perpendicular to the first straight line direction, the positioning coil assembly comprising a plurality of positioning beacons and an in-position detection coil, the plurality of positioning beacons comprising a first positioning beacon, a second positioning beacon, and a third positioning beacon being arranged at intervals along the first straight line direction with the second positioning beacon located between the first positioning beacon and the third positioning beacon, the second positioning beacon and the in-position detection coil being arranged along the second straight line direction”.
He further does not disclose “detecting, via a sensor on the robot, magnetic induction signals from the positioning coil assembly; determining a deviation of the robot relative to the second straight line direction based on the detected magnetic induction signals; and adjusting a moving direction of the robot to align with the second straight line direction to approach the charging base”.
Seong teaches the charging base (“charging station 20” with “power transmission pad 21”; Fig. 3) comprising a positioning coil assembly (combo of “LF antennas” shown in Figs. 10A-10B, 14A; referred to as “auxiliary coils” in ¶ [132, 139]) having a first straight line direction (direction “Y”, labeled in Fig. 14A) and a second straight line direction (direction “X”, labeled in Fig. 14A) perpendicular to the first straight line direction (direction “Y”).
Seong teaches the positioning coil assembly (combo of “LF antennas” shown in Figs. 10A-10B, 14A) comprises a plurality of positioning beacons (plurality of “low frequency transmitting antennas (LFA)”, including “LFA A”, “LFA B”, and “LFA C”; Figs. 10A, 14A) and an in-position detection coil (“LFA” in the location labeled in the annotated Fig. 10A, included supra in the claim 1 section).
Seong further teaches (see annotated Fig. 14A) the plurality of positioning beacons (LFA) comprising a first positioning beacon (“LFA C”), a second positioning beacon (“LFA A”), and a third positioning beacon (“LFA B”) being arranged at intervals along (see note 10-1, included infra) the first straight line direction (direction “Y”).
NOTE 10-1: The claim language “arranged … along” does not necessarily limit the positions to be in a line, but merely that they are nearby a line; Fig. 14A shows that when viewed from above, each of the positioning beacons is spaced along the “Y” direction.
Seong further teaches the second positioning beacon (“LFA A”) located between the first positioning beacon (“LFA C”) and the third positioning beacon (“LFA B”).
Seong further teaches the second positioning beacon (“LFA A”) and the in-position detection coil (see annotated Fig. 10A) being arranged along the second straight line direction (direction “X”).
Seong further teaches the method (¶ [9]: “position measurement method for wireless charging”; ¶ [10]: “position alignment method”) comprising the following.
Seong further teaches navigating the vehicle (“10”; Fig. 3; analogous to the robot because each is maneuverable to receive charging power) toward the charging base (20 / 21).
Seong further teaches detecting, via a sensor (combo of “LFA” on the vehicle-side; Fig. 14A shows “LFA α”, “LFA β”, & “LFA γ”; ¶ [161]: “LF receiving antennas”; ¶ [174]: “the LF receiving antennas of the transmission coil receive all values of magnetic fields emitted by the transmitter”) on the vehicle (10), magnetic induction signals (Figs. 9A-9C depict the magnetic fields detected; ¶ [147-149]) from the positioning coil assembly (combo of “LF antennas” shown in Figs. 10A-10B, 14A).
Seong further teaches determining a deviation (“Δy”; Fig. 3; ¶ [132]: “distance is measured by sensing the weak magnetic fields induced in the auxiliary coils”; ¶ [178]: “magnetic field analysis and distance measurement are performed via the LF receiving antennas of the transmission coil and the LF transmitters of the reception coil”) of the vehicle (“10”, analogous to the robot) relative to the second straight line direction (direction “Y”) based on the detected magnetic induction signals (Figs. 9A-9C depict the magnetic fields detected; ¶ [15, 132, 147-149, 174, 178]).
Seong further teaches this positioning coil assembly improves charging efficiency by improving positional alignment of the wireless power transfer coils (¶ [22, 118-119, 122-123]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method and charging base disclosed by He to incorporate a positioning coil assembly in the charging base such that the sensor can determine a position deviation from detecting magnetic induction intensity changes, as taught by Seong, to improve charging efficiency by improving the fine positional alignment of the wireless power transfer coils between the rob and the charging base.
Brou teaches (see annotated Fig. 29; ¶ [175]: “FIG. 29 generally shows an overall path P of the robot 12 to the docking station 14”) adjusting a moving direction of the robot (“robot 12”; Figs. 1, 29) to align with the second straight line direction (centerline defined by “center long range signal CL”; Fig. 29; ¶ [182]: “path that will move the center of the robot into alignment with the center of the docking station 14 is estimated”; ¶ [182]: “estimate path can be a predetermined path based on the robot's estimated orientation that can reliably get the robot 12 into alignment with the center of the docking station 14”) to approach the charging base (14).
PNG
media_image8.png
623
885
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Brou further teaches adjusting the robot’s movement path to align with the second straight line direction to approach the charging base to improve reliability of navigation and alignment with the charging base (¶ [4, 182]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of approaching the charging base disclosed by the combo of He & Seong to adjust the moving direction of the robot to align with the second straight line direction to approach the charging area, as taught by Brou, to improve reliability of navigation and alignment with the charging base.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1), Brouwers et al. (US 2021/0228039 A1; hereinafter “Brou”), and Ebrahimi Afrouzi (US 10,698,411 B1; hereinafter “Ebra”), and as evidenced by Wu (US 2017/0344014 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, the combo of He, Seong, & Brou teaches the method of claim 10.
The combo of He & Seong teaches the determining the deviation (from Seong: identify deviation “Δy”; Seong ¶ [178]: “magnetic field analysis and distance measurement”) by the sensor (from Seong: combo of “LF receiving antennas”) based on the detected magnetic induction signals (Seong ¶ [132]: “distance is measured by sensing the weak magnetic fields induced in the auxiliary coils”).
He does not disclose “the determining the deviation comprises identifying which of the first positioning beacon or the third positioning beacon is detected by the sensor based on a frequency of the detected magnetic induction signals”.
Ebra teaches the determining the deviation (identifies deviation of position into “range 200” or “range 202” by distinguishing received signal frequency to be associated with either beacon signal “134” or “136”) comprises identifying which of the first positioning beacon (“left signal emitter 126”; Fig. 2) or the third positioning beacon (“right signal emitter 128”; Fig. 2) is detected by the sensor (combo of “112” & “114”; Figs. 1A, 3) based on a frequency (col. 2, lines 23-24: “first and second signals are unique from each other so that they may be differentiated”; col. 2, lines 23-24: “signals may be differentiated by … a carrier frequency of a signal”) of the detected beacon signals (col. 2, lines 21-22: “126 emits a first signal 134” and “128 emits a second signal 136”; analogous to magnetic fields per note 11-1, included infra).
NOTE 11-1: Though the beacon signals taught by Ebra are not magnetic fields, they are analogous because each is used as a beacon signal generated by one of three different positioning beacons to enable the robot to determine its position. The magnetic fields were established based on other prior art, as detailed supra. Thus, one of ordinary skill understands that Ebra’s teachings with respect to the beacon signals are applicable to the magnetic fields.
Ebra further teaches using beacon signals of different frequencies to identify the deviation to clearly distinguish which side the robot is positioned on (col. 2, lines 16-36).
Wu provides evidence that Ebra’s approach of differentiating the beacon signals via timing, frequency, and/or modulation (¶ [28] discusses various techniques of differentiating the beacon signals) can be applied to the beacon signals (E1, E2, E3) generated by a set of three positioning beacons (121, 122, 123), such as those disclosed by the combo of He & Seong.
Wu further teaches using different beacon signals (E1, E2, E3) to improve efficiency of moving the robot and improve accuracy of docking the robot (¶ [8]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the magnetic fields generated by the three positioning beacons disclosed by the combo of He, Seong, & Brou to be of different frequencies, as taught by Ebra, with evidence from Wu, to clearly distinguish which side of the second straight line direction that the robot is positioned on, which improves efficiency of moving the robot and improves accuracy of docking the robot.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1), Brouwers et al. (US 2021/0228039 A1; hereinafter “Brou”), and Jeong et al. (US 2014/0156076 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, the combo of He & Seong teaches the method of claim 10.
He does not disclose “the adjusting the moving direction comprises: controlling the robot to move backward by a first preset distance; and controlling the robot to move laterally by a second preset distance”.
Jeong teaches (see annotated Fig. 7, included supra in the claim 6 section) the adjusting the moving direction (moving along the detour route per step S300 of Figs. 5-6) comprises controlling the robot (“robot cleaner 10”; Figs. 1-2, 7) to move backward by a first preset distance (Fig. 6, step S310: “retreat by predetermined distance”) and controlling the robot (10) to move laterally by a second preset distance (distance “Pd2” from “a1” to “second position a2”; Fig. 7).
Jeong further teaches this movement adjustment technique to return to the desired position and movement path (“detour route”) after detecting a deviation, which enables the robot to move properly after the correction (¶ [92-99]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the movement adjustment technique disclosed by the combo of He, Seong, & Brou to move backward by a first preset distance and then move laterally by a second preset distance, as taught by Jeong, technique to return to the desired position and movement path after detecting a deviation, which enables the robot to move properly after the correction.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1), Brouwers et al. (US 2021/0228039 A1; hereinafter “Brou”), and Cong et al. (US 2025/0216867 A1).
Regarding Claim 13, the combo of He, Seong, & Brou teaches the method of claim 10.
He does not disclose “controlling the robot to perform a cleaning task on the charging base; controlling the robot to return to a charging positioning point after the cleaning task; and controlling the robot to rotate by a preset angle so that an electric energy receiving device of the robot faces the charging base”.
Cong teaches controlling the robot (“cleaning robot 10”) to perform a cleaning task (combination of tasks including repeated execution of vacuuming the room and “self-cleaning” per ¶ [128], wherein dust is removed from the robot “10” by the charging base “20”; see note 13-1, included infra) on the charging base (“base 20”; per ¶ [145], “20” is also equipped to remove dirt from the “cleaning robot 10”).
NOTE 13-1: The claim term “cleaning task” can be broadly interpreted to be any task in the process of cleaning. In the case of Cong, this may include emptying a vacuum tank or other “self-cleaning” of the robot which takes place at the site of the charging base. It is understood that the instant application’s specification ¶ [138] discloses “Through the execution of cleaning task, sundries or obstacles in the charging area can be effectively removed, so as to facilitate the smooth progress of subsequent automatic charging”, which is a more specific “cleaning task” than is presently claimed. Though the instant application discloses the robot cleans obstacles from the charging area (also known as “charging base”), this level of specificity of the “cleaning task on the charging base” is not presently claimed.
Cong further teaches performing a cleaning task (¶ [4, 128]: “self-cleaning”) on the charging base to enable the robot to continue cleaning more effectively by emptying the robot’s dust bucket or washing the robot’s mop at the site of the charging base (¶ [4, 128]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method disclosed by the combo of He, Seong, & Brou to perform a cleaning task on the charging base, as taught by Cong, to enable the robot to continue cleaning more effectively by emptying the robot’s dust bucket or washing the robot’s mop at the site of the charging base.
Brou further teaches (see the docking process in the annotated Fig. 34, included infra) controlling the robot (12) to return to a charging positioning point (position reached after step (a) for the rotation of step (b); Fig. 34) after the cleaning task (docking process of Fig. 34 occurs when the robot needs charging after cleaning).
Brou further teaches controlling the robot to rotate (Fig. 34 steps (b)-(c)) by a preset angle (angle between approach angle and perpendicular from “14”, as shown in Fig. 34 steps (a)-(c)) so that an electric energy receiving device (82) of the robot (12) faces the charging base (Fig. 34, step (c) shows “82” facing “14”).
PNG
media_image9.png
950
1168
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Brou further teaches to clean, then return to the charging positioning point, and then rotate by a preset angle to face the charging base to improve reliability of navigation and alignment with the charging base (¶ [4, 182]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method disclosed by the combo of He, Seong, Brou, & Cong to return to the charging positioning point after the cleaning task, and then rotate by a preset angle to face the charging base, as further taught by Brou, to improve reliability of navigation and alignment with the charging base.
NOTE 13-1: Though not relied upon, Vogel et al. (US 2018/0246518 A1) also teaches subject matter relevant to claim 13.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1), Brouwers et al. (US 2021/0228039 A1; hereinafter “Brou”), and Shimizu et al. (US 2024/0396378 A1; hereinafter “Shi”).
Regarding Claim 14, the combo of He, Seong, & Brou teaches the method of claim 10.
The combo of He, Seong, & Brou teaches detecting whether the sensor (Seong’s combo of “LF receiving antennas”) has reached an in-position detection coil (identified in Seong’s annotated Fig. 10A) of the charging base (He’s “101”, modified per teachings of Seong’s analogous “20” / “21”) based on an intensity of the detected magnetic induction signals (Seong ¶ [178]: “magnetic field analysis and distance measurement are performed via the LF receiving antennas).
He does not disclose “detecting whether the sensor has reached an in-position detection coil of the charging base based on an intensity of the detected magnetic induction signals exceeding a threshold”.
Shi teaches detecting whether the sensor (“power reception coil 31”, acting as a sensor to detect alignment “power transmission coil 18” and “position detection pattern coil 19”; Fig. 1) has reached an in-position detection coil (“position detection pattern coil 19”; Fig. 1) of the charging base (“charging device 10a”; Fig. 1) based on an intensity of the detected magnetic induction signals exceeding a threshold (¶ [6]: “acquire magnitude of received power received by the terminal device; detect a position at which the power receiver of the terminal device is placed; set a threshold for determining whether to stop wireless charging in accordance with the received power and the position at which the power receiver is placed; and determine whether to continue or stop charging based on a comparison between the transmitted power and the threshold”)
Shi further teaches comparing the detected magnetic induction signals with a threshold to ensure high efficiency of the magnetic coupling for wireless power transfer based on alignment of the sensor with the in-position detection coil (¶ [42]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method disclosed by the combo of He, Seong, & Brou to detect whether the sensor has reached the in-position detection coil based on an intensity of the detected magnetic induction signals exceeding a threshold, as taught by Shi, to improve efficiency of the magnetic coupling for wireless power transfer by ensuring proper alignment.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1), Brouwers et al. (US 2021/0228039 A1; hereinafter “Brou”), and Ärlig et al. (US 2022/0305658 A1).
Regarding Claim 15, the combo of He, Seong, & Brou teaches the method of claim 10.
The combo of He, Seong, & Brou teaches the navigating the robot (He’s “200”, modified per teachings of Seong & Brou) toward the charging base (He: “101”; analogous Seong’s “20” / “21”) comprises using the positioning coil assembly (incorporated from Seong: combo of “LF antennas” shown in Figs. 10A-10B, 14A).
He does not disclose “the navigating the robot toward the charging base comprises initially guiding the robot to a charging positioning point using a real time kinematic (RTK) positioning system before using the positioning coil assembly”.
Ärlig teaches (see annotated Fig. 5, included supra in the claim 9 section) the navigating the robot (“robotic lawnmower 200”; Figs. 4-5) toward the charging base (“charging station 310”; Figs. 4-5) comprises initially guiding the robot (200) to a charging positioning point (“hand-over point P”; Figs. 4-5) using a real time kinematic (RTK) positioning system (combo of “at least one satellite 330A” and “RTK beacon 330B”; Figs. 4-5; ¶ [56]) before (¶ [77]: “navigate the robotic work tool based on the satellite navigation device to a hand-over point; and to cause the robotic work tool to enter a service station utilizing deduced reckoning by propelling the robotic lawnmower a predefined distance”; ¶ [21])) navigating to reach the charging position (navigates from “P” to within/on “310”).
Ärlig further teaches an RTK positioning system that guides the robot to a charging positioning point before navigating to the positioning coil assembly to enable accurate navigation and obstacle avoidance when the robot is located far away from the charging base (¶ [22, 57-58, 78]), which improves reliability of the robot’s ability to navigate to the charging base (¶ [9-10]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method disclosed by the combo of He, Seong, & Brou to use an RTK positioning system to guide the robot to a charging positioning point before using the positioning coil assembly, based on the teachings of Ärlig, to improve reliability of the robot’s ability to navigate to the charging base.
Claims 16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, He discloses a charging base (“wireless charging station 100”, including “bottom plate 101”; Figs. 1-3, 4A-4B, 5-11, 13) for a robot (“self-moving device 200”; Figs. 1, 4A-4B, 8-13; ¶ [207]: “200 may be an automatic or semi-automatic machine such as an intelligent lawn mower, an intelligent sweeper, an intelligent snow sweeper, an intelligent sprinkler, or an intelligent camera robot”), comprising the following features.
He further discloses a base housing (housing of “101”) having an upper surface configured to support (¶ [212]: “200 can walk on the bottom plate 101 smoothly”) the robot (200).
He further discloses an electric energy supply device (“wireless transmitting module 102”; Fig. 2) accommodated in the base housing (housing of “101”) and comprising a transmitting coil (“resonant coil transmitting component 103”; Fig. 2).
He does not disclose “a positioning coil assembly accommodated in the base housing, wherein: the positioning coil assembly comprises a plurality of positioning beacons and an in-position detection coil, the plurality of positioning beacons comprise a first positioning beacon, a second positioning beacon, and a third positioning beacon that are arranged at intervals along a first straight line direction with the second positioning beacon located between the first positioning beacon and the third positioning beacon, the second positioning beacon, the transmitting coil, and the in-position detection coil are arranged along a second straight line direction, and the first straight line direction is perpendicular to the second straight line direction”.
Seong teaches a positioning coil assembly (combo of “LF antennas” shown in Figs. 10A-10B, 14A; referred to as “auxiliary coils” in ¶ [132, 139]) accommodated in the base housing (structure of “power transmission pad 21”; Fig. 3).
Seong teaches the positioning coil assembly (combo of “LF antennas” shown in Figs. 10A-10B, 14A) comprises a plurality of positioning beacons (plurality of “low frequency transmitting antennas (LFA)”, including “LFA A”, “LFA B”, and “LFA C”; Figs. 10A, 14A) and an in-position detection coil (“LFA” in the location labeled in the annotated Fig. 10A, included supra in the claim 1 section).
Seong further teaches (see annotated Fig. 14A) the plurality of positioning beacons (LFA) comprise a first positioning beacon (“LFA C”), a second positioning beacon (“LFA A”), and a third positioning beacon (“LFA B”) that are arranged at intervals along (see note 1-1, included supra in the claim 1 section) a first straight line direction (direction “Y”, labeled in Fig. 14A).
Seong further teaches the second positioning beacon (“LFA A”) located between the first positioning beacon (“LFA C”) and the third positioning beacon (“LFA B”).
Seong further teaches the second positioning beacon (“LFA A”), the transmitting coil (“primary coil”), and the in-position detection coil (see annotated Fig. 10A) are arranged along a second straight line direction (direction “X”, labeled in Fig. 14A).
Seong further teaches the first straight line direction (direction “Y”) is perpendicular to the second straight line direction (direction “X”).
Seong further teaches this positioning coil assembly improves charging efficiency by improving positional alignment of the wireless power transfer coils (¶ [22, 118-119, 122-123]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the charging base disclosed by He to incorporate a positioning coil assembly such that the sensor can determine a position deviation from detecting magnetic induction intensity changes as taught by Seong, to improve charging efficiency by improving the fine positional alignment of the wireless power transfer coils between the rob and the charging base.
Regarding Claim 18, the combo of He & Seong teaches the charging base of claim 16.
The combo of He & Seong further teaches (see the annotated He Fig. 2, included supra in the claim 1 section) the transmitting coil (He: “resonant coil transmitting component 103”; Seong equivalent: “primary coil”) is located between the second positioning beacon (from Seong: “LFA A”, incorporated into He’s charging base as shown in the annotated He Fig. 3) and the in-position detection coil (from Seong, incorporated into He’s charging base as shown in the annotated He Fig. 3) along the second straight line direction (He: “Front” / “Rear”; Seong equivalent: direction “X”).
Regarding Claim 19, the combo of He & Seong teaches the charging base of claim 16.
The combo of He & Seong further teaches the first straight line direction (He: “Right” / “Left”; Seong equivalent: direction “Y”) intersects the second straight line direction (He: “Front” / “Rear”; Seong equivalent: direction “X”) to form a T-shaped layout of magnetic field sources (see the annotated He Fig. 2, included supra in the claim 1 section).
Regarding Claim 20, the combo of He & Seong teaches the charging base of claim 16.
The combo of He & Seong further teaches (see Seong’s Fig. 14A, included supra with annotations; Fig. 14A shows that when viewed in the “Y” direction, the “LFA A” is wider than each of the “LFA B” and “LFA C”) a width of the one of the plurality of positioning beacons (Seong’s second positioning beacon “LFA A”) arranged along the second straight line direction (He: “Front” / “Rear”; Seong equivalent: direction “X”) is greater than a width of other ones of the plurality of positioning beacons (Seong’s first positioning beacon “LFA C” and third positioning beacon “LFA B”) in the first straight line direction (He: “Right” / “Left”; Seong equivalent: direction “Y”).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0029477 A1) in view of Seong (US 2020/0136438 A1) and Ebrahimi Afrouzi (US 10,698,411 B1; hereinafter “Ebra”), and as evidenced by Wu (US 2017/0344014 A1).
Regarding Claim 17, the combo of He & Seong teaches the charging base of claim 16.
The combo of He & Seong teaches the first positioning beacon (from Seong: “LFA C”), the second positioning beacon (from Seong: “LFA A”), and the third positioning beacon (from Seong: “LFA B”) are configured to generate magnetic fields (Seong ¶ [119]: “The LF signal is a digitally modulated magnetic field that operates in a low frequency ITU radio band”).
Though the combo of He & Seong teaches the first positioning beacon, the second positioning beacon, and the third positioning beacon are configured to generate magnetic fields, He does not disclose these generated magnetic fields, i.e. the beacon signals, are “of different frequencies”.
Ebra teaches the plurality of positioning beacons (“left signal emitter 126” and “right signal emitter 128”; Fig. 2) are configured to generate beacon signals (col. 2, lines 21-22: “126 emits a first signal 134” and “128 emits a second signal 136”; analogous to magnetic fields per note 17-1, included infra) of different frequencies (col. 2, lines 23-24: “first and second signals are unique from each other so that they may be differentiated”; col. 2, lines 23-24: “signals may be differentiated by … a carrier frequency of a signal”).
NOTE 17-1: Though the beacon signals taught by Ebra are not magnetic fields, they are analogous because each is used as a beacon signal generated by one of three different positioning beacons to enable the robot to determine its position. The magnetic fields were established based on other prior art, as detailed supra. Thus, one of ordinary skill understands that Ebra’s teachings with respect to the beacon signals are applicable to the magnetic fields.
Ebra further teaches using beacon signals of different frequencies to identify the deviation to clearly distinguish which side the robot is positioned on (col. 2, lines 16-36).
Wu provides evidence that Ebra’s approach of differentiating the beacon signals via timing, frequency, and/or modulation (¶ [28] discusses various techniques of differentiating the beacon signals) can be applied to the beacon signals (E1, E2, E3) generated by a set of three positioning beacons (121, 122, 123), such as those disclosed by the combo of He & Seong.
Wu further teaches using different beacon signals (E1, E2, E3) to improve efficiency of moving the robot and improve accuracy of docking the robot (¶ [8]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the magnetic fields generated by the three positioning beacons disclosed by the combo of He & Seong to be of different frequencies, as taught by Ebra, with evidence from Wu, to clearly distinguish which side of the second straight line direction that the robot is positioned on, which improves efficiency of moving the robot and improves accuracy of docking the robot.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel P McFarland whose telephone number is (571)272-5952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM Eastern.
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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/DANIEL P MCFARLAND/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights