DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 23, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Oten (US 4600229 A).
Regarding claim 23, Oten discloses a suction-nipple comprising an extending corrugated tube-shape with two or more units/rings, said suction-nipple comprising an interlock mechanism comprising ribs with bulges and protrusions (60, 62) that interact with one another when said suction- nipple is cramped, said interlock mechanism having two configurations:
- a first open-configuration when said suction-nipple is not attached to a fruit and no vacuum is generated, in which said interlock mechanism is open and said suction-nipple is free to twist (fig. 3); and
- a second locked/cramped-configuration (fig. 4) when said suction-nipple is attached to a fruit and vacuum is applied, in which said interlock mechanism is locked by interaction of said bulges and protrusions thereby preventing twisting of said suction-nipple (col. 4 lines 45-47).
It is noted that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. The limitation “attached to a fruit” is not a positive recitation of a fruit, and does not preclude suction-nipple arrangements used in applications other than picking fruit. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Regarding claim 25, Oten discloses the suction-nipple (10) of claim 23, which is flexible to enable fitting any fruit's shape.
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 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (US 20210267125 A1) in view of Oten (US 4600229 A).
Regarding claim 29, Lu discloses a method for harvesting fruits, comprising the steps of:
a) providing a vacuum-based fruit gripper assembly comprising a support (18) and a flexible gripping suction-nipple (gripping orifice 34, with bellows 58 shown in fig. 11D), wherein said suction-nipple comprises an extending corrugated tube-shape with two or more units/rings (see fig. 11D);
b) mounting said fruit gripper assembly onto a fruit-picking machine (10);
c) penetrating said fruit gripper assembly into a tree's foliage (paragraph 0027);
d) approaching and engaging a fruit with said suction-nipple while said interlock mechanism is in said first open-configuration, wherein said suction-nipple is free to twist (paragraph 0027);
e) activating a vacuum to suction-grip said fruit, thereby preventing twisting of said suction-nipple (paragraph 0033, 34 is sealed to the fruit for firm gripping); and
f) twisting and/or tilting said fruit until it is released from the tree (paragraph 0036-37).
Lu does not disclose said suction-nipple having an interlock mechanism with a first open-configuration and a second locked-configuration, said-suction interlock mechanism comprising ribs with bulges and protrusions that interact with one another when said suction-nipple is cramped.
Oten discloses a gripper having a suction-nipple (bellows type cup 10) equipped with an interlock mechanism comprising ribs with bulges and protrusions (60, 62) with a first open-configuration (fig. 3, col. 4 line 58-col. 5 line 30) and a second locked/cramp configuration (fig. 4, col. 4 lines 45-57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the suction-nipple of Lu with an interlock mechanism, as disclosed by Oten, to add radial stability to the bellows suction-nipple (col. 4 lines 45-57).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 10, 15, 19-22, 26-27 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 23, 25 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed 5/18/26 regarding claim 29 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant’s arguments, filed 5/18/2026, with respect to Claims 1, 2, and 26 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1, 2, and 26 has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADELINE RUNCO whose telephone number is (469)295-9123. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 M-F.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/MADELINE I RUNCO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights