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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject t333o 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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being Anticipated by Angerer et al. (US 20240091843 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Angerer discloses:
A workpiece transferring tool (12 & 13 & 14 & 16 & 16 & 17 & 18 & 19 & 20 & 21 & 22 & 23 & 24 & 25 & 26 & 27 & 28) comprising:
a base (20) mounted on a distal end of a wrist of a robot (6 & 8 & 10) (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2) [0053 & 0054 & 0055 & 0056 & 0057 & 0058];
a rotatable member (12) that is attached to the base member and that is rotatable around a rotation axis (11) of a distal end of the wrist (Fig. 2) [0053 & 0054 & 0056]; and
a workpiece holder (13) whose proximal end is attached to the rotatable member (Fig. 2), wherein a workpiece (16) is hung on a distal end of the workpiece holder [0013 & 0017 & 0018 & 0022],
wherein the proximal end of the workpiece holder is attached to the rotatable member so that the proximal end is distant from the rotation axis at any time (Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being Anticipated by Ramunas (US 4797564 A).
Regarding Claim 11, Ramunas discloses:
A robot comprising:
a robot arm (12);
a controller (44) configured to control the robot arm [Column 3 Lines 6-55]; and
a workpiece holder (13) capable of holding a workpiece [abstract & Column 1 Lines 6-10 & 64-68 & Column 2 Lines 29-35],
wherein the controller has a safety stop function to stop the robot arm for safety based on a force applied to the robot arm [abstract & Column 1 Lines 32-68 & Column 2 Liens 1-12 & Column 2 Lines 29-39 & Column 3 Lines 18-68 & Column 4 Lines 36-66],
wherein the robot further comprises a movable connection part (51 & 52 & 53 & 77 & 78 & 79) connecting the workpiece holder to a base (22) provided at a distal end of the robot so that the workpiece holder is displaceable in an escape direction of an inertia force acting on the workpiece [Column 3 Lines 56-68 & Column 4 Lines 1-68 & Column 5 Lines 1-9],
wherein the movable connection unit comprises a first linear movement mechanism (79) that is fixed to the base and that has a first slider linearly movable in a first horizontal direction, and a second linear movement mechanism (77 & 78) that is supported by the first slider and that has a second slider (77) linearly movable in a second horizontal direction orthogonal to the first horizontal direction (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 8) [Column 4 Lines 23-66],
wherein the workpiece holder is supported by the second slider of the second linear movement mechanism (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 8) [Column 4 Lines 23-66], and
wherein, when the robot arm executes a motion in a state in which the workpiece is held by the workpiece holder, the workpiece holder is displaced due to the inertia force so as to prevent an erroneous stop of the robot arm caused by the safety stop function [Column 4 Lines 23-668 & Column 5 Lines 1-20].
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 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 of this title, 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, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schnoor et al. (US 20040265110 A1) in view of Ramunas (US 4797564 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Schnoor teaches:
A robot comprising:
a robot arm (1.0);
a controller configured to control the robot arm [0001 & 0018];
a workpiece holder (5.3) capable of holding a workpiece (5.4) (Fig. 5a & Fig. 5c) [0053 & 0054]; and
wherein the controller is configured to control the robot arm to prevent a force applied to the robot arm due to inertia force of the workpiece caused by moving the workpiece with the robot arm from exceeding a predetermined value while the robot arm is operating [0046 & 0057 & 0058 & 0061],
wherein the robot further comprises a movable connection part (5.8 & 5.8a & 5.9) connecting the workpiece holder to a base (5.1 & 5.2 & 5.3) provided at a distal end of the robot (Fig. 5a & Fig. 5c) [0053 & 0054 & 0055] so that the workpiece holder is displaceable in an escape direction of an inertia force acting on the workpiece [0053 & 0054],
wherein the movable connection part is a rotation support mechanism to which the workpiece holder, is connected, and the rotation support mechanism is configured to support the workpiece holder in a freely swingable manner about at least an axis orthogonal to a moving-direction of the workpiece (Fig. 5a & Fig. 5c) [0053 & 0054 & 0055], and,
wherein, when the robot arm executes a motion in a state in which the workpiece is held by the workpiece holder, the workpiece holder swings due to the inertia force so as to prevent the workpiece inertia force from exceeding a predetermined value while the robot arm is operating (Fig. 4 & Fig. 5a & Fig. 5c) [0053 & 0054 & 0055].
Schnoor does not explicitly teach:
wherein the controller has a safety stop function to stop the robot arm for safety based on a force applied to the robot arm;
the workpiece holder prevents an erroneous stop of the robot arm caused by the safety stop function.
Ramunas teaches:
A robot comprising:
a robot arm (12);
a controller (44) configured to control the robot arm [Column 3 Lines 6-55]; and
a workpiece holder (13) capable of holding a workpiece [abstract & Column 1 Lines 6-10 & 64-68 & Column 2 Lines 29-35],
wherein the controller has a safety stop function to stop the robot arm for safety based on a force applied to the robot arm [abstract & Column 1 Lines 32-68 & Column 2 Liens 1-12 & Column 2 Lines 29-39 & Column 3 Lines 18-68 & Column 4 Lines 36-66],
wherein the robot further comprises a movable connection part (51 & 52 & 53 & 77 & 78 & 79) connecting the workpiece holder to a base (22) provided at a distal end of the robot so that the workpiece holder is displaceable in an escape direction of an inertia force acting on the workpiece [Column 3 Lines 56-68 & Column 4 Lines 1-68 & Column 5 Lines 1-9],
wherein the movable connection unit comprises a first linear movement mechanism (79) that is fixed to the base and that has a first slider linearly movable in a first horizontal direction, and a second linear movement mechanism (77 & 78) that is supported by the first slider and that has a second slider (77) linearly movable in a second horizontal direction orthogonal to the first horizontal direction (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 8) [Column 4 Lines 23-66],
wherein the workpiece holder is supported by the second slider of the second linear movement mechanism (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 8) [Column 4 Lines 23-66], and
wherein, when the robot arm executes a motion in a state in which the workpiece is held by the workpiece holder, the workpiece holder is displaced due to the inertia force so as to prevent an erroneous stop of the robot arm caused by the safety stop function [Column 4 Lines 23-668 & Column 5 Lines 1-20].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handling robot taught by Schnoor with the handling robot with external force sensing and shutdown protection controller that is configured to stop the robot arm when a force applied to the robot arm due to inertia force of the workpiece caused by moving the workpiece with the robot arm exceeds a predetermined value while the robot arm is operating taught by Ramunas in order to provide a means of preventing damage to the transfer robot and workpiece by preventing overload due to movement of the robot arm in a manner which could cause disengagement of the object to the gripper in order to prevent failure in the process and damage to the object being transported due to disengagement from force overload.
Regarding Claim 2, Schnoor teaches:
the movable connection part is configured so that the workpiece holder swings in response to movement of the workpiece by the robot arm (Fig. 4 & Fig. 5a & Fig. 5c) [0049 & 0050 & 0053 & 0054 & 0055], and
the movable connection part is configured to mitigate inertia during acceleration of the system thereby preventing the inertia of the workpiece from exceeding a predetermined value while the robot arm is operating (Fig. 4 & Fig. 5a & Fig. 5c) [0053 & 0054 & 0055]
Schnoor does not explicitly teach:
wherein the controller has a safety stop function to stop the robot arm for safety based on a force applied to the robot arm;
Ramunas teaches:
a robot (10) comprising:
a controller [0001 & 0018];
wherein the controller has a safety stop function to stop the robot arm for safety based on a force applied to the robot arm [0007 & 0046 & 0049];
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handling robot taught by Schnoor with the handling robot with external force sensing and shutdown protection controller that is configured to stop the robot arm when a force applied to the robot arm due to inertia force of the workpiece caused by moving the workpiece with the robot arm exceeds a predetermined value while the robot arm is operating, where the controller has a safety stop function to stop the robot arm for safety based on a force applied to the robot arm taught by Ramunas in order to provide a means of preventing damage to the transfer robot and workpiece by preventing overload due to movement of the robot arm in a manner which could cause disengagement of the object to the gripper in order to prevent failure in the process and damage to the object being transported due to disengagement from force overload.
Regarding Claim 4, Schnoor discloses:
the rotation support mechanism is a universal joint or a spherical bearing (Fig. 5a & Fig. 5c) [0053 & 0054 & 0055].
Regarding Claim 7, Schnoor teaches:
an urging means (5.11 & 5.12) provided between the base and the workpiece holder to forcibly return the workpiece holder toward a standard position relative to the base [0055].
Regarding Claim 8, Schnoor does not teach:
the workpiece holder is a hook on which the workpiece is hung.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a hook instead of a gripper for holding an article to be supported in order to provide a means for securing an article with a curved shape more securely to prevent loss of an article being transferred since the Examiner takes OFFICIAL NOTICE that hooks for supporting transferred articles were well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 9, Schnoor teaches:
the workpiece holder is a hand that grips the workpiece [0006 & 0008].
Regarding Claim 10, Schnoor teaches:
the workpiece holder is a suction device that attracts the workpiece [0006 & 0009 & 0043 & 0047].
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramunas (US 4797564 A).
Regarding Claim 5, Ramunas teaches:
a workpiece transferring tool [Column 1 Lines 5-10 & Column 1 Lines 64-68 & Column 2 Lines 29-35] comprising:
a base (22) mounted on a distal end of a wrist of a robot [Column 2 Lines 36-68 & Column 3 Lines 56-68],
a workpiece holder for directly and releasably holding a workpiece [Column 1 Lines 5-10 & Column 1 Lines 64-68 & Column 2 Lines 29-35], and
a moveable connection unit (53 & 77 & 78 & 79) connecting the workpiece holder to the base (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 8) so that the workpiece holder is displaceable in an escape direction of an external force acting on the workpiece [Column 3 Lines 56-68 & Column 4 Lines 1-68 & Column 5 Lines 1-9],
wherein the movable connection unit comprises a first linear movement mechanism that is fixed to the base and that has a first slider linearly movable in a first horizontal direction of the workpiece by the robot (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 8) [Column 4 Lines 23-35], and a second linear movement mechanism (77 & 78) that is supported by the first slider and that has a second slider linearly movable in a second horizontal direction orthogonal to the first horizontal direction (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 8) [Column 4 Lines 23-35],
wherein the workpiece holder is supported by the second slider of the second linear movement mechanism [Column 1 Lines 5-10 & Column 1 Lines 64-68 & Column 2 Lines 29-35 & Column 4 Lines 23-35].
Ramunas does not explicitly teach:
the workpiece holder is a hook.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a means for securing an article with a curved shape more securely to prevent loss of an article being since the Examiner takes OFFICIAL NOTICE that hooks for supporting transferred articles were well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramunas (US 4797564 A) in view of Angerer et al. (US 20240091843 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, Ramunas teaches:
A robot comprising:
a robot arm (12);
a controller (44) configured to control the robot arm [Column 3 Lines 6-55]; and
a workpiece holder (13) capable of holding a workpiece [abstract & Column 1 Lines 6-10 & 64-68 & Column 2 Lines 29-35],
wherein the controller has a safety stop function to stop the robot arm for safety based on a force applied to the robot arm [abstract & Column 1 Lines 32-68 & Column 2 Liens 1-12 & Column 2 Lines 29-39 & Column 3 Lines 18-68 & Column 4 Lines 36-66],
wherein the robot further comprises a movable connection part (51 & 52 & 53 & 77 & 78 & 79) connecting the workpiece holder to a base (22) provided at a distal end of the robot so that the workpiece holder is displaceable in an escape direction of an inertia force acting on the workpiece [Column 3 Lines 56-68 & Column 4 Lines 1-68 & Column 5 Lines 1-9],
wherein the movable connection unit comprises a first linear movement mechanism (79) that is fixed to the base and that has a first slider linearly movable in a first horizontal direction, and a second linear movement mechanism (77 & 78) that is supported by the first slider and that has a second slider (77) linearly movable in a second horizontal direction orthogonal to the first horizontal direction (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 8) [Column 4 Lines 23-66],
wherein the workpiece holder is supported by the second slider of the second linear movement mechanism (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 8) [Column 4 Lines 23-66], and
wherein, when the robot arm executes a motion in a state in which the workpiece is held by the workpiece holder, the workpiece holder is displaced due to the inertia force so as to prevent an erroneous stop of the robot arm caused by the safety stop function [Column 4 Lines 23-668 & Column 5 Lines 1-20].
Ramunas does not teach:
the movable part comprises a rotatable member that is attached to the base member and that is rotatable around a rotation axis extending in an up-down direction,
wherein a proximal end of the workpiece holder is attached to the rotatable member so that the proximal end is distant from the rotation axis at any time even when the rotatable member rotates.
Angerer teaches:
A workpiece transferring tool (12 & 13 & 14 & 16 & 16 & 17 & 18 & 19 & 20 & 21 & 22 & 23 & 24 & 25 & 26 & 27 & 28) comprising:
a base (20) mounted on a distal end of a wrist of a robot (6 & 8 & 10) (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2) [0053 & 0054 & 0055 & 0056 & 0057 & 0058];
a rotatable member (12) that is attached to the base member and that is rotatable around a rotation axis (11) of a distal end of the wrist (Fig. 2) [0053 & 0054 & 0056]; and
a workpiece holder (13) whose proximal end is attached to the rotatable member (Fig. 2), wherein a workpiece (16) is hung on a distal end of the workpiece holder [0013 & 0017 & 0018 & 0022],
wherein the proximal end of the workpiece holder is attached to the rotatable member so that the proximal end is distant from the rotation axis at any time (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handling robot utilizing inertia driven cartesian workpiece holder mount movable part for preventing damage to the robot taught by Ramunas with the handling robot a workpiece holder mounted to a movable part on the wrist, the movable part comprises a rotatable member that is attached to the base member and that is rotatable around a rotation axis extending in an up-down direction, where a proximal end of the workpiece holder is attached to the rotatable member so that the proximal end is distant from the rotation axis at any time even when the rotatable member rotates taught by Angerer in order to provide a means of preventing damage to the transfer robot and workpiece by preventing overload due to movement of the robot arm in a manner which could cause disengagement of the object to the gripper which better compensated for arcuate motion of the robot wrist in order to prevent failure in the process and damage to the object being transported due to disengagement from force overload.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claim 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Examiner’s assertion of OFFICIAL NOTICE as it relates to the use of a hook instead of a gripper for holding an article to be supported in order to provide a means for securing an article with a curved shape more securely to prevent loss of an article being transferred is taken to be admitted prior art due to the Applicant's failure to traverse the Examiner's assertion of OFFICIAL NOTICE.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENDAN P TIGHE whose telephone number is 571-272-4872. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 7:00-5:30 EST
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, SAUL RODRIGUEZ can be reached on 571-272-7097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRENDAN P TIGHE/Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652