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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/14/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see pages 8-12, filed 01/14/2026, regarding the claims rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art, Ghuman et al. US 20050044700 A1 (“Ghuman”) in combination with Amirehteshami et al. US 20120011693 A1 (“Amirehteshami”), Schönberg US 20170113344 A1 (“Schönberg”), and Ebrahimi Afrouzi et al. US 20200225673 A1 (“Ebrahimi Afrouzi”), do not teach the elements of the amended claim 1. However, as discussed in further detail below, and as previously discussed in the interview on 08/08/2025, these amendments are either explicitly covered by the prior art, implicitly covered, or would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed. Applicant argues on page 10 that Ghuman does not teach the elements regarding a plurality of first robots positioned in a first configuration around the central robot, or a plurality of second robots positioned in a second configuration around the central robot, on the grounds that Ghuman’s example in paragraphs 36 and 40 disclose examples of workcells that do not have a robot in the center of the examples. However, as described in the previous office action, the workcells of Ghuman are designed to be modular, and arranging a workcell like the one in FIG. 9 to be organized around a central robot, such as the hexapod manipulator in FIG. 4, described in paragraph 28, would have been an obvious substitution of parts to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 7, 9, and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghuman et al. US 20050044700 A1 (“Ghuman”) in combination with Amirehteshami et al. US 20120011693 A1 (“Amirehteshami”), Schönberg US 20170113344 A1 (“Schönberg”), and Ebrahimi Afrouzi et al. US 20200225673 A1 (“Ebrahimi Afrouzi”).
Regarding Claim 1. Ghuman teaches a manufacturing cell for assembling a structure, comprising:
a plurality of first robots positioned in a first configuration around a central robot (FIG. 13 shows an arrangement of robots around a common indexing shuttle at numeral 134. Additionally, in one embodiment, the workpiece is held by a hexapod manipulator at 46 of FIG. 4 [paragraph 28], meaning that in at least one embodiment, the assembly operation of the structure can be held by an end effector of a central robot); and
a plurality of second robots positioned in a second configuration around the central robot (FIG. 13 shows an arrangement of robots around a common indexing shuttle at numeral 134. There are two groups of robots visible in FIG. 13, with four robots for welding labeled 136 and three slide-mounted robots at 138, 140, and 142 for handling material);
wherein:
at least one of the plurality of first robots is configured to conduct a first assembly operation of the structure as a first subassembly of the structure is being held by an end effector of at least one of the plurality of second robots,
at least one of the plurality of second robots is configured to translate towards and away from the central robot and to conduct a second assembly operation with the structure as a second subassembly of the structure is being held by an end effector of the central robot (Slide-mounted robots such as 140 and 142 of FIG. 13, allow workpieces to be placed on either one of tool plates at 132, allowing the welding robots to work on the workpieces [paragraph 40]. FIG. 13 shows how robots 140 and 142 translate towards and away from the common point to interact with one of the plurality of second robots by placing workpieces on the indexing shuttle. Ghuman teaches in paragraph 8 that adding flexibility to robot paths and reach to weld different automobile body styles. Ghuman goes on to explain that the objective of their system is to provide a flexible system and method of manufacture that enables rapid changeovers between automotive vehicle bodies of different types that may be built on different platforms [paragraph 10], and to utilize a sequence of manufacturing steps and a set of manufacturing station templates for manufacturing a plurality of different types of complex body units [paragraph 13]. Ghuman refers to this as a flexible manufacturing system preferably utilizing different standardized flexible work cells [paragraph 25]. In particular, work cell eleven provides a very high level of flexibility because of a diverging arrangement of the slide mounts for material handling robots at 140 and 142 of FIG. 13 [paragraph 41]. The process line for assembly can be made flexible so that a first set of different subassemblies can be manufactured on the process line which differs from one another, and these different subassemblies can be manufactured simultaneously due to the presence on the process line of workpiece presenters which have a tooling plate for each separate subassembly [paragraph 49], meaning that the parts adhered together can be used to form subassemblies for assembling a structure. Ghuman also teaches that in one embodiment, the workpiece is held by a hexapod manipulator at 46 of FIG. 4 [paragraph 28], meaning that in at least one embodiment, the assembly operation of the structure can be held by an end effector of a central robot at a common point. While the particular robot holding the workpiece is different from the robots in several other embodiments, the workcells of Ghuman are intended to be modifiable, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the workcell of FIG. 13 (the primary workcell used to teach the language of the independent claims) with the workcell of FIG. 4 in part because it would be an obvious combination of known elements to form a predictable result under the KSR principles, but also because it would allow the assembly cell to work without relying on a tabletop fixture like the one in FIG. 2),
at least the plurality of first robots or the plurality of second robots comprises a curing robot configured to cure adhesive to adhere parts together to form subassemblies of the structure when assembling the structure, and
at least a first part of the first subassembly or a second part of the second subassembly is adhered with the curing robot (FIG. 13 shows robots that include four welding robots at 136, and three robots for handling material that allow workpieces to be placed on the tool plates at 132 [paragraph 40]. Optionally, robots 136 could be other types of robots such as sealing or adhesive dispensing units. The process line for assembly can be made flexible so that a first set of different subassemblies can be manufactured on the process line which differs from one another, and these different subassemblies can be manufactured simultaneously due to the presence on the process line of workpiece presenters which have a tooling plate for each separate subassembly [paragraph 49], meaning that the parts adhered together can be used to form subassemblies for assembling a structure).
Ghuman does not teach that the workcell of FIG. 13 also has the second configuration being closer to the central robot than the first configuration;
However, Ghuman does teach a different workcell in FIG. 9 in which a plurality of second robots is positioned around a common point in a second configuration, the second configuration being closer to the central robot than the first configuration (FIG. 9 shows a first and second group of robots, labeled 110 and 106, respectively, wherein at least one of the robots labeled 110 is capable of moving on a mounted slide, but the robots of group 106 are all closer than the robots of group 110).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman in FIG. 13 with the second configuration being closer to the central robot than the first configuration as shown in Ghuman, FIG. 9 so that the robots in the second group tasked with working on pieces delivered by the robots in group one can work on the pieces with more precision, while the robots in group one can move further away from the common point so as to retrieve distant pieces.
Ghuman does not teach:
a computing system configured to issue commands to controllers of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots (Ghuman implies this in claim 4, but it isn’t explicit).
However, Amirehteshami teaches:
a computing system configured to issue commands to controllers of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots (Paragraph 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with a computing system configured to issue commands to controllers of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots as taught by Amirehteshami so that the entire robot facility can be automated by a central controller.
Ghuman also does not teach:
a metrology system mounted in a central location above the manufacturing cell and configured to measure at least one of positions of robotic arms of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots or structures held by the robots.
However, Schönberg teaches:
a metrology system mounted in a central location above the manufacturing cell and configured to measure at least one of positions of robotic arms of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots or structures held by the robots (The robot or robots can include a measurement system, which can be a measurement system which is known from the prior art or can combine multiple known measurement systems with each other. If there is more than one robot, all the robots can be of equal standing or there can be one or more master robots and one or more slave robots. Collaboration between two or more robots is enabled by a communications standard which is implemented either in the facility or via additional programs [paragraph 10]. FIG. 2 relates to a facility comprising six robots which collaborate with each other and collectively place stringers on a sub-assembly. In this facility 101, the robot movements and other parameters of the robots 104, 105 are again monitored by one or more measurement systems. In FIG. 2, only one embodiment of the measurement system is shown. Other measurement systems can for example be attached to a ceiling (not shown) and/or a wall (not shown) [paragraph 64]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with a metrology system mounted in a central location above the manufacturing cell and configured to measure at least one of positions of robotic arms of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots or structures held by the robots as taught by Schönberg as it would have been obvious to try, as there are a finite number of places where the metrology system could be located and still perform the disclosed functions, as well as applying a known technique (mounting a camera in the middle of the ceiling) to produce predictable results with a high expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 2. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 1.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein at least the plurality of first robots are equidistant from the common point in the first configuration or at least the plurality of second robots are equidistant from the central robot in the second configuration (FIG. 14 shows a group of stationary robots positioned around a common point on an indexing shuttle at approximately the same point. The robots are all indicated to be the same type of welding robot with the same length in each arm, meaning that they would need to be placed the same distance away from the shuttle in order to reach the target workpiece).
Additionally, MPEP 2144.05 states that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art.” Ghuman does not disclose a specific distance of location for each robot; it simply shows a group of robots that are positioned around a common point. This creates a potential range wide enough to allow the robots to be equidistant from the common point in either the first or second configuration. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman to include the plurality of second robots are equidistant from the common point in the second configuration.
Regarding Claim 3. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 1.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein the plurality of first robots are fixedly positioned in the first configuration when the plurality of second robots translate towards and away from the central robot, or the plurality of second robots are fixedly positioned in the second configuration when the plurality of first robots translate towards and away from the central robot (FIG. 13 shows an arrangement of robots around a common indexing shuttle at numeral 134. There are two groups of robots visible in FIG. 13, with four robots for welding labeled 136 and three slide-mounted robots at 138, 140, and 142 for handling material. The group of robots labeled 136 are in fixed positions, while the group of robots that are slide-mounted can move along the slide-mounts).
Regarding Claim 4. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 1.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein the plurality of first robots comprise a material handling robot configured to pick and join the parts and an adhesive dispensing and curing robot configured to dispense the adhesive and to cure the adhesive to adhere the parts together to form the subassemblies when assembling the structure; and
wherein the plurality of second robots comprise a material handling and curing robot configured to pick and join the parts and to cure the adhesive to adhere the parts together to form subassemblies when assembling the structure (FIG. 13 shows robots that include four welding robots at 136, and three robots for handling material that allow workpieces to be placed on the tool plates at 132 [paragraph 40]. Optionally, robots 136 could be other types of robots such as sealing or adhesive dispensing units. The process line for assembly can be made flexible so that a first set of different subassemblies can be manufactured on the process line which differs from one another, and these different subassemblies can be manufactured simultaneously due to the presence on the process line of workpiece presenters which have a tooling plate for each separate subassembly [paragraph 49], meaning that the parts adhered together can be used to form subassemblies for assembling a structure).
Ghuman does not teach that the work cell in FIG. 13 also includes wherein the plurality of first robots comprise an adhesive dispensing robot configured to adhere the parts together. However, Ghuman does teach other types of work cells, such as work cell eight in FIG. 10, have welding robots that are equipped for welding parts together, and visibly shown to be mounted on the same translation slides that are shown in FIG. 13, and as stated above, replacing welding robots with other types of adhesive dispensing and sealing robots is taught in paragraph 40. This means that the group of robots capable of moving can also be adhesive dispensing and curing robots configured to adhere parts together.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman in FIG. 13 with wherein the plurality of first robots comprise an adhesive dispensing and curing robot configured to adhere the parts together as taught by Ghuman in FIG. 10, because this would allow the mobile robots to move to workpieces that require adhesive instead of relying exclusively on the fixed robots for this task.
Regarding Claim 6. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 4.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots are divided within separate zones for simultaneously assembling different parts to form the subassemblies (The process line for assembly can be made flexible so that a first set of different subassemblies can be manufactured on the process line which differs from one another, and these different subassemblies can be manufactured simultaneously due to the presence on the process line of workpiece presenters which have a tooling plate for each separate subassembly [paragraph 49], meaning two separate groups of assembly robots can be positioned in separate zones for assembling different parts to form the subassemblies).
Regarding Claim 7. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 6.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein one of the plurality of first robots or one of the plurality of second robots is configured to translate across the separate zones (Work cell eleven (FIG. 13) shows robots at 140 and 142 being able to move on slide-mounts. This work cell provides a very high level of flexibility because the diverging arrangement of the slide mounts for material handling robots allow for feeder stations (not shown) which may accommodate a wide range of component parts and sub-assemblies [paragraph 41]. As stated before, the robots at 140 and 142 can be used to place workpiece on the tool plates at 132 of FIG. 13, and can therefore handle material from feeder stations such as a previous work cell or subassembly).
Regarding Claim 9. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 4.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein the plurality of first robots comprise a plurality of material handling robots and a plurality of adhesive dispensing and curing robots (FIG. 9 shows a setup of robots wherein material handling robots are shown at 110, and welding or sealing (adhesive) robots are labeled 106 [paragraph 36]. At least one side (subzone) of the indexing shuttle mechanism at 104 in the arrangement has a plurality of both types of robots).
Ghuman does not expressly teach:
wherein the plurality of material handling robots and the plurality of adhesive dispensing and curing robots are alternately arranged in the first configuration.
However, MPEP 2144.05 states that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art.” Ghuman does not disclose an arrangement in which the plurality of material handling robots and the plurality of adhesive dispensing robots are alternately arranged in the first configuration. However, Ghuman does teach in FIG. 17 a line of robots labeled 178, which can be the robots shown, or robotic welders or sealing or adhesive robots [paragraph 45]. While Ghuman does not expressly teach that these robots can include material handling robots in an alternating arrangement, the options that Ghuman does include would allow for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to arrange material handling robots and adhesive dispensing robots in an alternating arrangement in the first configuration. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman to include wherein the plurality of material handling robots and the plurality of adhesive dispensing and curing robots are alternately arranged in the first configuration.
Regarding Claim 11. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 4.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein the robots include a material handling and curing robot (A plurality of both adhesive dispensing and material handling robots are shown in FIG. 13).
Ghuman does not teach:
wherein the robots are configured to switch between different end-effectors based on the subassemblies being assembled.
However, Amirehteshami teaches:
wherein the robots are configured to switch between different end-effectors based on the subassemblies being assembled (A manufacturing apparatus that may have a plurality of groups of robots, which can be a plurality of pairs of robots, wherein each pair may have a first robot with a plurality of Multi-Function End Effectors (MFEEs) having integrated modules for performing various manufacturing operations of a manufacturing process [paragraph 33]. The second robot of each pair of robots may also handle a plurality of end effectors. This system is meant to manufacture components or subassemblies [paragraph 31], and the end effectors are for performing various manufacturing operations of a manufacturing process [paragraph 33]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman wherein the robots are configured to switch between different end-effectors based on the subassemblies being assembled as taught by Amirehteshami so as to allow the manufacturing cell to fit multiple end-effectors on the same robot for space saving and efficiency purposes.
Regarding Claim 12. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 4.
Ghuman also teaches:
Wherein the robots include a material handling robot and a material handling and curing robot (A plurality of both adhesive dispensing and material handling robots are shown in FIG. 13).
Ghuman does not teach:
further comprising:
one or more pairs of part tables movably positioned at a perimeter of the manufacturing cell for access by the material handling robot and the material handling and curing robot;
wherein one table in each pair is accessible for the parts while another table in each pair is being reloaded with different parts.
However, Amirehteshami teaches:
further comprising:
one or more pairs of part tables movably positioned at a perimeter of the manufacturing cell for access by the material handling robot and the material handling and curing robot (A moving pair of stringer platforms carrying a supply of stringers in FIG. 3 into position in the work area to be picked up and positioned by the pairs of robots [paragraph 39]);
wherein one table in each pair is accessible for the parts while another location is being reloaded with different parts (FIG. 12 shows that stringers to be attached to the skin panel and previously positioned on stringer platforms may then be moved into pick-up position in the work area [paragraph 85]. The fact that these are completed stringers indicate that they are different from the parts placed on the stringer platforms in FIG. 3).
Amirehteshami does not expressly teach that the pick-up position is another moving table to be loaded with different parts. However, MPEP 2144.05 states that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art.” Amirehteshami does not disclose that one table in each pair is being reloaded with different parts; it merely states that finished stringers are moved into pick-up position in the work area [paragraph 85]. However, it is possible to arrange the invention of Amirehteshami so that the pick-up position is a moving stringer platform, like one of the platforms described in paragraph 39. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Amirehteshami to include wherein one table in each pair is accessible for the parts while the other table in each pair is being reloaded with different parts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman further comprising: one or more pairs of part tables movably positioned at a perimeter of the manufacturing cell for access by the material handling robot and the material handling and curing robot; wherein one table in each pair is accessible for the parts while another table in each pair is being reloaded with different parts as taught by Amirehteshami so as to allow the robot assembly cell to have a means for bringing in new parts to be worked on and removing finished parts from the work area.
Regarding Claim 13. Ghuman teaches a manufacturing cell for assembling a structure, comprising:
a first set of robots arranged along a perimeter of a first shape (FIG. 13 shows an arrangement of robots around a common indexing shuttle at numeral 134. Additionally, in one embodiment, the workpiece is held by a hexapod manipulator at 46 of FIG. 4 [paragraph 28], meaning that in at least one embodiment, the assembly operation of the structure can be held by an end effector of a central robot);
a second set of robots arranged along a perimeter of a second shape within the first shape (FIG. 13 shows an arrangement of robots around a common indexing shuttle at numeral 134. There are two groups of robots visible in FIG. 13, with four robots for welding labeled 136 and three slide-mounted robots at 138, 140, and 142 for handling material),
wherein a central robot is located within the second shape and
wherein:
at least one of the robots of the first set of robots is configured to conduct a first assembly operation of the structure as a first subassembly of the structure is being held by an end effector of at least one of the robots of the second set,
at least one of the robots of the second set of robots is configured to translate along a second path towards and away from the first shape to conduct a second assembly operation of the structure as a second subassembly of the structure is being held by an end effector of the central robot (Slide-mounted robots such as 140 and 142 of FIG. 13, allow workpieces to be placed on either one of tool plates at 132, allowing the welding robots to work on the workpieces [paragraph 40]. FIG. 13 shows how robots 140 and 142 translate towards and away from the common point to interact with one of the plurality of second robots by placing workpieces on the indexing shuttle. Ghuman teaches in paragraph 8 that adding flexibility to robot paths and reach to weld different automobile body styles. Ghuman goes on to explain that the objective of their system is to provide a flexible system and method of manufacture that enables rapid changeovers between automotive vehicle bodies of different types that may be built on different platforms [paragraph 10], and to utilize a sequence of manufacturing steps and a set of manufacturing station templates for manufacturing a plurality of different types of complex body units [paragraph 13]. Ghuman refers to this as a flexible manufacturing system preferably utilizing different standardized flexible work cells [paragraph 25]. In particular, work cell eleven provides a very high level of flexibility because of a diverging arrangement of the slide mounts for material handling robots at 140 and 142 of FIG. 13 [paragraph 41]. The process line for assembly can be made flexible so that a first set of different subassemblies can be manufactured on the process line which differs from one another, and these different subassemblies can be manufactured simultaneously due to the presence on the process line of workpiece presenters which have a tooling plate for each separate subassembly [paragraph 49], meaning that the parts adhered together can be used to form subassemblies for assembling a structure. Ghuman also teaches that in one embodiment, the workpiece is held by a hexapod manipulator at 46 of FIG. 4 [paragraph 28], meaning that in at least one embodiment, the assembly operation of the structure can be held by an end effector of a central robot at a common point. While the particular robot holding the workpiece is different from the robots in several other embodiments, the workcells of Ghuman are intended to be modifiable, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the workcell of FIG. 13 (the primary workcell used to teach the language of the independent claims) with the workcell of FIG. 4 in part because it would be an obvious combination of known elements to form a predictable result under the KSR principles, but also because it would allow the assembly cell to work without relying on a tabletop fixture like the one in FIG. 2),
at least the plurality of first robots or the plurality of second robots comprises a curing robot configured to cure adhesive to adhere parts together to form subassemblies of the structure when assembling the structure, and
at least a first part of the first subassembly or a second part of the second subassembly is adhered with the curing robot (FIG. 13 shows robots that include four welding robots at 136, and three robots for handling material that allow workpieces to be placed on the tool plates at 132 [paragraph 40]. Optionally, robots 136 could be other types of robots such as sealing or adhesive dispensing units. The process line for assembly can be made flexible so that a first set of different subassemblies can be manufactured on the process line which differs from one another, and these different subassemblies can be manufactured simultaneously due to the presence on the process line of workpiece presenters which have a tooling plate for each separate subassembly [paragraph 49], meaning that the parts adhered together can be used to form subassemblies for assembling a structure).
Ghuman does not teach:
a computing system configured to issue commands to controllers of the first set of robots and the second set of robots (Ghuman implies this in claim 4, but it isn’t explicit).
However, Amirehteshami teaches:
a computing system configured to issue commands to controllers of the first set of robots and the second set of robots (Paragraph 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with a computing system configured to issue commands to controllers of the first set of robots and the second set of robots as taught by Amirehteshami so that the entire robot facility can be automated by a central controller.
Ghuman also does not teach:
a metrology system mounted in a central location above the manufacturing cell and configured to measure at least one of positions of robotic arms of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots or structures held by the robots.
However, Schönberg teaches:
a metrology system mounted in a central location above the manufacturing cell and configured to measure at least one of positions of robotic arms of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots or structures held by the robots (The robot or robots can include a measurement system, which can be a measurement system which is known from the prior art or can combine multiple known measurement systems with each other. If there is more than one robot, all the robots can be of equal standing or there can be one or more master robots and one or more slave robots. Collaboration between two or more robots is enabled by a communications standard which is implemented either in the facility or via additional programs [paragraph 10]. FIG. 2 relates to a facility comprising six robots which collaborate with each other and collectively place stringers on a sub-assembly. In this facility 101, the robot movements and other parameters of the robots 104, 105 are again monitored by one or more measurement systems. In FIG. 2, only one embodiment of the measurement system is shown. Other measurement systems can for example be attached to a ceiling (not shown) and/or a wall (not shown) [paragraph 64]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with a metrology system mounted in a central location above the manufacturing cell and configured to measure at least one of positions of robotic arms of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots or structures held by the robots as taught by Schönberg as it would have been obvious to try, as there are a finite number of places where the metrology system could be located and still perform the disclosed functions, as well as applying a known technique (mounting a camera in the middle of the ceiling) to produce predictable results with a high expectation of success.
Ghuman also does not teach:
wherein the metrology system communicates with the computing system to provide data for move-measure-correct (MMC) procedures.
However, Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches:
wherein the metrology system communicates with the computing system to provide data for move-measure-correct (MMC) procedures (Paragraphs 8 and 179, which covers a robot moving from a first location to a second location, measuring the movement, and correcting the movement data of the robot based on the measurement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with wherein the metrology system communicates with the computing system to provide data for move-measure-correct (MMC) procedures as taught by Ebrahimi Afrouzi because a method in which a robot moves, the movement is measured, and the robot position is then corrected is common in the art, and using a specific set of procedures would purely be an obvious design choice.
Regarding Claim 14. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 13.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein the first shape or the second shape is a polygon comprising one of a triangle, a quadrilateral, a pentagon, a hexagon, a heptagon, or an octagon (The robots in FIG. 9 show that the stationary robots labeled 106 form either a quadrilateral or a pentagon, depending upon whether or not all robots along the right-hand side of the shuttling indexing mechanism opposite the slide-mounted robot at 110 are all arranged in a straight line).
Regarding Claim 15. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 13.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein at least the first set of robots are equidistantly positioned along the perimeter of the first shape or at least the second set of robots are equidistantly positioned along the perimeter of the second shape (FIG. 14 shows a group of stationary robots positioned around a common point on an indexing shuttle at approximately the same point. The robots are all indicated to be the same type of welding robot with the same length in each arm, meaning that they would need to be placed the same distance away from the shuttle in order to reach the target workpiece).
Additionally, MPEP 2144.05 states that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art.” Ghuman does not disclose a specific distance of location for each robot; it simply shows a group of robots that are positioned around a common point. This creates a potential range wide enough to allow the robots to be equidistant from the common point in either the first or second configuration. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman to include the plurality of second robots are equidistant from the common point in the second configuration.
Regarding Claim 16. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 13.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein the first set of robots are fixedly positioned along the perimeter of the first shape when the second set of robots translate along the second path, or the second set of robots are fixedly positioned along the perimeter of the second shape when the first set of robots translate along the first path (FIG. 13 shows an arrangement of robots around a common indexing shuttle at numeral 134. There are two groups of robots visible in FIG. 13, with four robots for welding labeled 136 and three slide-mounted robots at 138, 140, and 142 for handling material. The group of robots labeled 136 are in fixed positions, while the group of robots that are slide-mounted can move along the slide-mounts).
Regarding Claim 17. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 13.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein the first set of robots comprise a material handling robot configured to pick and join the parts and an adhesive dispensing and curing robot configured to dispense the adhesive and to cure the adhesive to adhere the parts together to form the subassemblies when assembling the structure; and
wherein the second set of robots comprise a material handling and curing robot configured to pick and join the parts and to cure the adhesive to adhere the parts together to form the subassemblies when assembling the structure (FIG. 13 shows robots that include four welding robots at 136, and three robots for handling material that allow workpieces to be placed on the tool plates at 132 [paragraph 40]. Optionally, robots 136 could be other types of robots such as sealing or adhesive dispensing units).
Ghuman does not teach that the work cell in FIG. 13 also includes wherein the first set of robots comprise an adhesive dispensing robot configured to adhere the parts together. However, Ghuman does teach other types of work cells, such as work cell eight in FIG. 10, have welding robots that are equipped for welding parts together, and visibly shown to be mounted on the same translation slides that are shown in FIG. 13, and as stated above, replacing welding robots with other types of adhesive dispensing and sealing robots is taught in paragraph 40. This means that the group of robots capable of moving can also be adhesive dispensing and curing robots configured to adhere parts together.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman in FIG. 13 with wherein the first set of robots comprise an adhesive dispensing and curing robot configured to adhere the parts together as taught by Ghuman in FIG. 10, because this would allow the mobile robots to move to workpieces that require adhesive instead of relying exclusively on the fixed robots for this task.
Regarding Claim 19. Ghuman teaches a manufacturing cell for assembling a structure, comprising:
a first set of robots arranged along a perimeter of a first shape (FIG. 9 shows a manufacturing cell in which a first set of robots are labeled 110 are positioned along a perimeter around a shuttling indexing mechanism [paragraph 36]);
a second set of robots arranged along a perimeter of a second shape within the first shape (A second group of robots at 106 form a smaller shape along a smaller perimeter inside the first [paragraph 36, FIG. 9]),
wherein:
at least one of the robots of the robots of the first set of robots is configured to conduct a first assembly operation of the structure as a first subassembly of the structure is being held by an end effector of at least one of the second set of robots,
at least one of the robots of the second set of robots is configured to translate along a second path towards and away from the first shape to conduct a second assembly operation of the structure as a first subassembly of the structure is being held by an end effector of the central robot (Slide-mounted robots such as 140 and 142 of FIG. 13, allow workpieces to be placed on either one of tool plates at 132, allowing the welding robots to work on the workpieces [paragraph 40]. FIG. 13 shows how robots 140 and 142 translate towards and away from the common point to interact with one of the plurality of second robots by placing workpieces on the indexing shuttle. Ghuman teaches in paragraph 8 that adding flexibility to robot paths and reach to weld different automobile body styles. Ghuman goes on to explain that the objective of their system is to provide a flexible system and method of manufacture that enables rapid changeovers between automotive vehicle bodies of different types that may be built on different platforms [paragraph 10], and to utilize a sequence of manufacturing steps and a set of manufacturing station templates for manufacturing a plurality of different types of complex body units [paragraph 13]. Ghuman refers to this as a flexible manufacturing system preferably utilizing different standardized flexible work cells [paragraph 25]. In particular, work cell eleven provides a very high level of flexibility because of a diverging arrangement of the slide mounts for material handling robots at 140 and 142 of FIG. 13 [paragraph 41]. The process line for assembly can be made flexible so that a first set of different subassemblies can be manufactured on the process line which differs from one another, and these different subassemblies can be manufactured simultaneously due to the presence on the process line of workpiece presenters which have a tooling plate for each separate subassembly [paragraph 49], meaning that the parts adhered together can be used to form subassemblies for assembling a structure. Ghuman also teaches that in one embodiment, the workpiece is held by a hexapod manipulator at 46 of FIG. 4 [paragraph 28], meaning that in at least one embodiment, the assembly operation of the structure can be held by an end effector of a central robot at a common point. While the particular robot holding the workpiece is different from the robots in several other embodiments, the workcells of Ghuman are intended to be modifiable, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the workcell of FIG. 13 (the primary workcell used to teach the language of the independent claims) with the workcell of FIG. 4 in part because it would be an obvious combination of known elements to form a predictable result under the KSR principles, but also because it would allow the assembly cell to work without relying on a tabletop fixture like the one in FIG. 2),
at least the first set of robots or the second set of robots comprises a curing robot configured to cure adhesive to adhere parts together to form subassemblies of the structure when assembling the structure, and
at least a first part of the first subassembly or a second part of the second subassembly is adhered with the curing robot (FIG. 13 shows robots that include four welding robots at 136, and three robots for handling material that allow workpieces to be placed on the tool plates at 132 [paragraph 40]. Optionally, robots 136 could be other types of robots such as sealing or adhesive dispensing units. The process line for assembly can be made flexible so that a first set of different subassemblies can be manufactured on the process line which differs from one another, and these different subassemblies can be manufactured simultaneously due to the presence on the process line of workpiece presenters which have a tooling plate for each separate subassembly [paragraph 49], meaning that the parts adhered together can be used to form subassemblies for assembling a structure).
Ghuman does not teach:
a computing system configured to issue commands to controllers of the first set of robots and the second set of robots (Ghuman implies this in claim 4, but it isn’t explicit).
However, Amirehteshami teaches:
a computing system configured to issue commands to controllers of the first set of robots and the second set of robots (Paragraph 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with a computing system configured to issue commands to controllers of the first set of robots and the second set of robots as taught by Amirehteshami so that the entire robot facility can be automated by a central controller.
Ghuman also does not teach:
a metrology system mounted in a central location above the manufacturing cell and configured to measure at least one of positions of robotic arms of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots or structures held by the robots (The robot or robots can include a measurement system, which can be a measurement system which is known from the prior art or can combine multiple known measurement systems with each other. If there is more than one robot, all the robots can be of equal standing or there can be one or more master robots and one or more slave robots. Collaboration between two or more robots is enabled by a communications standard which is implemented either in the facility or via additional programs [paragraph 10]. FIG. 2 relates to a facility comprising six robots which collaborate with each other and collectively place stringers on a sub-assembly. In this facility 101, the robot movements and other parameters of the robots 104, 105 are again monitored by one or more measurement systems. In FIG. 2, only one embodiment of the measurement system is shown. Other measurement systems can for example be attached to a ceiling (not shown) and/or a wall (not shown) [paragraph 64]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with a metrology system mounted in a central location above the manufacturing cell and configured to measure at least one of positions of robotic arms of the plurality of first robots and the plurality of second robots or structures held by the robots as taught by Schönberg as it would have been obvious to try, as there are a finite number of places where the metrology system could be located and still perform the disclosed functions, as well as applying a known technique (mounting a camera in the middle of the ceiling) to produce predictable results with a high expectation of success.
Ghuman also does not teach:
wherein the metrology system communicates with the computing system to provide data for move-measure-correct (MMC) procedures.
However, Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches:
wherein the metrology system communicates with the computing system to provide data for move-measure-correct (MMC) procedures (Paragraphs 8 and 179, which covers a robot moving from a first location to a second location, measuring the movement, and correcting the movement data of the robot based on the measurement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with wherein the metrology system communicates with the computing system to provide data for move-measure-correct (MMC) procedures as taught by Ebrahimi Afrouzi because a method in which a robot moves, the movement is measured, and the robot position is then corrected is common in the art, and using a specific set of procedures would purely be an obvious design choice.
Regarding Claim 20. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 19.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein the first shape or the second shape is a polygon comprising one of a triangle, a quadrilateral, a pentagon, a hexagon, a heptagon, or an octagon (The robots in FIG. 9 show that the stationary robots labeled 106 form either a quadrilateral or a pentagon, depending upon whether or not all robots along the right-hand side of the shuttling indexing mechanism opposite the slide-mounted robot at 110 are all arranged in a straight line).
Claim(s) 5, 18, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghuman et al. US 20050044700 A1 (“Ghuman”) in combination with Amirehteshami et al. US 20120011693 A1 (“Amirehteshami”), Schönberg US 20170113344 A1 (“Schönberg”), and Ebrahimi Afrouzi et al. US 20200225673 A1 (“Ebrahimi Afrouzi”) as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Yang et al. US 20180108548 A1 (“Yang”).
Regarding Claim 5. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 4.
Ghuman does not teach:
wherein the central robot is configured to receive the subassemblies from the plurality of second robots.
However, Yang teaches:
wherein the central robot is configured to receive the subassemblies from the plurality of second robots (A system for processing workpieces where a plurality of processing modules can be arranged around a central robot for moving workpieces among the plurality of processing chambers or locations [paragraph 3]. FIG. 7A shows a rotary robot that can extend and grab a workpiece from one chamber and move it to another).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with wherein the central robot is configured to receive the subassemblies from the plurality of second robots as taught by Yang so that a robot in the center of the workcell can handle workpieces and move them to desired chambers as necessary.
Regarding Claim 18. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 17.
Ghuman does not teach:
wherein the central robot is configured to receive the subassemblies from the second set of robots.
However, Yang teaches:
wherein the central robot is configured to receive the subassemblies from the second set of robots (A system for processing workpieces where a plurality of processing modules can be arranged around a central robot for moving workpieces among the plurality of processing chambers or locations [paragraph 3]. FIG. 7A shows a rotary robot that can extend and grab a workpiece from one chamber and move it to another).
Regarding Claim 21. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 1.
Ghuman does not teach:
wherein the central robot is positioned at a geometric center of the manufacturing cell.
However, Yang teaches:
wherein the central robot is positioned at a geometric center of the manufacturing cell (FIGS. 7A and 7B show this exact arrangement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with wherein the central robot is positioned at a geometric center of the manufacturing cell as taught by Yang as this arrangement would have been obvious to try; there are a finite number of places that a “central robot” could be positioned in order to be a central robot, and the geometric center is one of said finite places.
Regarding Claim 22. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 13.
Ghuman does not teach:
wherein the central robot is positioned at a geometric center of the manufacturing cell.
However, Yang teaches:
wherein the central robot is positioned at a geometric center of the manufacturing cell (FIGS. 7A and 7B show this exact arrangement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with wherein the central robot is positioned at a geometric center of the manufacturing cell as taught by Yang as this arrangement would have been obvious to try; there are a finite number of places that a “central robot” could be positioned in order to be a central robot, and the geometric center is one of said finite places.
Regarding Claim 23. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 19.
Ghuman does not teach:
wherein the central robot is positioned at a geometric center of the manufacturing cell.
However, Yang teaches:
wherein the central robot is positioned at a geometric center of the manufacturing cell (FIGS. 7A and 7B show this exact arrangement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman with wherein the central robot is positioned at a geometric center of the manufacturing cell as taught by Yang as this arrangement would have been obvious to try; there are a finite number of places that a “central robot” could be positioned in order to be a central robot, and the geometric center is one of said finite places.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghuman et al. US 20050044700 A1 (“Ghuman”) in combination with Amirehteshami et al. US 20120011693 A1 (“Amirehteshami”), Schönberg US 20170113344 A1 (“Schönberg”), and Ebrahimi Afrouzi et al. US 20200225673 A1 (“Ebrahimi Afrouzi”) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Jittu et al. US 20170144183 A1 (“Jittu”).
Regarding Claim 8. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 6.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein a material handling robot is diagonally opposed to one of the plurality of first robots within either the first subzone or the second subzone (As shown in FIG. 13, one of the material handling robots at 140 can be positioned diagonally opposed to one of the fixed robots at 136. Interpreting the opposing sides of the indexing shuttle at 134 as the different subzones, the material handling robot at 140 is diagonally opposed to one of the first robots within the opposite subzone); and
wherein the curing robot is diagonally opposed to another of the plurality of first robots within both the first subzone and the second subzone (FIG. 9 shows a robot labeled 106 positioned diagonally located from the robots in a first subzone across from a shuttle mechanism at 104. The robots labeled 106 can also be positioned diagonally opposed to one of the robots labeled 110, specifically robots not mounted on the moving slide at 108, which are located in the second subzone. These robots can include part welding robots [paragraph 36]. Adhesive dispensing or sealing robots are suggested in other work cells as alternatives to welding robots [paragraph 40], so it would be obvious to use an adhesive dispensing robot, sealing robot, or other type of curing robot in the work cell of FIG. 9).
Ghuman does not teach:
wherein each zone comprises a first subzone and a second subzone;
wherein the plurality of second robots comprises a material handling robot and the curing robot.
However, Jittu teaches:
wherein each zone comprises a first subzone and a second subzone;
wherein the plurality of second robots comprises a material handling robot and the curing robot (A robot apparatus shown in FIGS. 1-6 can have two separate rails, forming two separate subzones for the first zone, and each zone can contain two robots, which are clearly depicted in FIG. 2. Robots in a work area are shown in FIGS. 1-6, and in each of these cells, different application robots may be mounted on the rails shown at numeral 40, including painting (curing) robots, assembly robots for material handling and sealing applications, etc. [paragraph 34]. Different application robots mounted on the same rail (same subzone) may even include one painting robot and one assembly robot).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman in FIG. 13 with wherein each zone comprises a first subzone and a second subzone; wherein the plurality of second robots comprises a material handling robot and the curing robot as taught by Jittu so as to allow the assembly cell to apply paint to workpieces as needed, and to divide each zone for tasks that need to be completed, so that paint is not applied until after the workpiece is prepared to be painted.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghuman et al. US 20050044700 A1 (“Ghuman”) in combination with Amirehteshami et al. US 20120011693 A1 (“Amirehteshami”), Schönberg US 20170113344 A1 (“Schönberg”), and Ebrahimi Afrouzi et al. US 20200225673 A1 (“Ebrahimi Afrouzi”) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Red et al. US 4831549 A (“Red”).
Regarding Claim 10. Ghuman in combination with Amirehteshami, Schönberg, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi teaches the manufacturing cell of claim 4.
Ghuman also teaches:
wherein the robots are configured to switch between different end-effectors.
However, Amirehteshami teaches:
wherein the robots are configured to switch between different end-effectors (A manufacturing apparatus that may have a plurality of groups of robots, which can be a plurality of pairs of robots, wherein each pair may have a first robot with a plurality of Multi-Function End Effectors (MFEEs) having integrated modules for performing various manufacturing operations of a manufacturing process [paragraph 33]. The second robot of each pair of robots may also handle a plurality of end effectors).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman wherein the robots are configured to switch between different end-effectors as taught by Amirehteshami so as to allow the manufacturing cell to fit multiple end-effectors on the same robot for space saving and efficiency purposes.
Ghuman also does not teach:
the material handling robot is applying a move-measure-correct procedure.
However, Red teaches:
the material handling robot is applying a move-measure-correct procedure (A method for improving orientation and/or location accuracy of a programmable robot with respect to a target, which includes developing a rigid body error correction based on detected position differences [Claim 7]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Ghuman the material handling robot is applying a move-measure-correct procedure as taught by Red so as to allow the material handling robots to correct for error in handling material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON G CAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-7009. The examiner can normally be reached Monday: 7:30am - 4:30pm EST to Friday 7:30pm - 4:30am.
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, Wade Miles can be reached at (571) 270-7777. 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.
/AARON G CAIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3656