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 Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. Claim 1 recites "a user input device including an actuation button that provides..." Claim 21 recites "a user input device including an actuation button that provides..." Claim 43 recites "a user input device including an actuation button configured to..." In each of these recitations, "an actuation button" is interpreted to be that which "provides" or is "configured to" function as claimed.
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 1-20, 22-26, 38, 39, and 43 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.
The claims are replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any further errors of which Applicant may become aware in the claims.
Claim 1 recites "one or more actuators in the system;" in line 21. It is unclear if this recitation is referring to "one or more actuators" previously introduced in line 17 or if this recitation includes another actuator or other actuators in the system. Thus, the metes and bounds of this recitation cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 1 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 1 is being further examined as though it reads "the one or more actuators in the system;" in line 21. Additionally, claims 2-20 are rejected because of their dependency on claim 1.
Claim 2 recites "the one or more paddles of the end-effector comprises two or more paddle components with one or more moving belts on each of the two or more paddle components." However, claim 1 (from which claim 2 depends) previously sets forth "one or more belts on the one or more paddles of the end-effector," in line 24. It is unclear whether the "one or more moving belts" recited in claim 2 are of the "one or more belts" in claim 1. Thus, the metes and bounds of the limitations of claim 2 cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 2 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). In view of the specification, claim 2 is being further examined as though the one or more moving belts recited therein are of the one or more belts set forth in claim 1.
Claim 18 recites "one or more paddles" in line 4. However, claim 1 (from which claim 18 depends) previously sets forth "one or more paddles" in lines 23-24. It is unclear whether the "one or more paddles" in claim 18 are of those in claim 1. Thus, the metes and bounds of "one or more paddles" in claim 18 cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 18 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 18 is being further examined as though it reads "the one or more paddles" in line 4.
Claim 19 recites "one or more belts" in line 4. However, claim 1 (from which claim 19 depends) previously sets forth "one or more belts" in line 24. It is unclear whether the "one or more belts" in claim 19 are of those in claim 1. Thus, the metes and bounds of "one or more belts" in claim 19 cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 19 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 19 is being further examined as though it reads "the one or more belts" in line 4.
Claim 19 recites "one or more paddles" in line 4. However, claim 1 (from which claim 19 depends) previously sets forth "one or more paddles" in lines 23-24. It is unclear whether the "one or more paddles" in claim 19 are of those in claim 1. Thus, the metes and bounds of "one or more paddles" in claim 19 cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 19 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 19 is being further examined as though it reads "the one or more paddles" in line 4.
Claim 20 recites "one or more paddles" in line 5. However, claim 1 (from which claim 20 depends) previously sets forth "one or more paddles" in lines 23-24. It is unclear whether the "one or more paddles" in claim 20 are of those in claim 1. Thus, the metes and bounds of "one or more paddles" in claim 20 cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 20 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 20 is being further examined as though it reads "the one or more paddles" in line 5.
Claim 20 recites "one or more belts" in line 6. However, claim 1 (from which claim 20 depends) previously sets forth "one or more belts" in line 24. It is unclear whether the "one or more belts" in claim 20 are of those in claim 1. Thus, the metes and bounds of "one or more belts" in claim 20 cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 20 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 20 is being further examined as though it reads "the one or more belts" in line 6.
Claims 22 recites "wherein the end-effector includes two or more paddle components with one or more moving belts on each of the two or more paddle components." However, claim 21 (from which claim 22 depends) has been amended to set forth "(2) one or more paddles of the end-effector, and (3) one or more belts on the one or more paddles of the end-effector;" in lines 21-22. It is unclear if the "two or more paddle components" in claim 22 are of or in addition to the "one or more paddles" in claim 21. Further, it is unclear if the "one or more moving belts" in claim 22 are of or in addition to the "one or more belts" in claim 21. Thus, the metes and bounds of the limitations in claim 22 cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 22 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 22 is being further examined as though it reads "wherein the one or more paddles of the end-effector comprises two or more paddle components, and wherein the one or more belts comprises one or more moving belts on each of the two or more paddle components." Additionally, claims 23-26 are rejected because of their dependency on claim 22.
Claim 38 recites "one or more paddles" in line 4. However, claim 21 (from which claim 38 depends) previously sets forth "one or more paddles" in line 21. It is unclear if these are the same "one or more paddles" or if another paddle or other paddles are being introduced. Thus, the metes and bounds of this recitation cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 38 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 38 is being further examined as though it reads "the one or more paddles" in line 4.
Claim 39 recites "one or more belts" in line 4. However, claim 21 (from which claim 39 depends) previously sets forth "one or more belts" in line 22. It is unclear if these are the same "one or more belts" or if another belt or other belts are being introduced. Thus, the metes and bounds of this recitation cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 39 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 39 is being further examined as though it reads "the one or more belts" in line 4.
Claim 43 recites the limitation "the one or more paddles" in lines 11-12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 43 recites the limitation "the one or more belts" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 43 recites the limitation "the ground vehicle" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 43 recites "a user input device" in line 16. However, claim 43 previously sets forth "a user input device" in line 10. It is unclear if these are the same user input device or if another user input device is being introduced in line 16. Thus, the metes and bounds of this recitation cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 43 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 43 is being further examined as though it reads "the user input device" in line 16.
Claim 43 recites "a ground vehicle" in line 17. However, claim 43 previously sets forth "the ground vehicle" in line 14. It is unclear if these are the same ground vehicle or if another ground vehicle is being introduced. Thus, the metes and bounds of this recitation cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 43 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 43 is being further examined as though it reads "a ground vehicle" in line 14 and "the ground vehicle" in line 16.
Claim 43 recites "operator input" in lines 16, 20, 24, and 27, respectively. However, claim 43 previously sets forth "operator input" in lines 10-11. It is unclear if "operator input" in lines 16, 20, 24, and 27 is that previously set forth in lines 10-11 or if other operator input is being claimed. Thus, the metes and bounds of "operator input" in claim 43 cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 43 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claim 43 recites "one or more actuators" in lines 21 and 25, respectively. It is unclear if these recitations are referring to "one or more actuators" previously introduced in line 9 or if these recitations include another actuator or other actuators in the system. Thus, the metes and bounds of these recitations cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 43 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 43 is being further examined as though it reads "the one or more actuators" in lines 21 and 25.
Claim 43 recites "one or more paddles" in line 24. However, claim 43 previously sets forth "the one or more paddles" in lines 11-12. It is unclear if these are the same "one or more paddles" or if another paddle or other paddles are being introduced. Thus, the metes and bounds of this recitation cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 43 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 43 is being further examined as though it reads "one or more paddles" in lines 11-12 and "the one or more paddles" in line 24.
Claim 43 recites "one or more belts" in line 27. However, claim 43 previously sets forth "the one or more belts" in line 12. It is unclear if these are the same "one or more belts" or if another belt or other belts are being introduced. Thus, the metes and bounds of this recitation cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 43 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 43 is being further examined as though it reads "one or more belts" in line 12 and "the one or more belts" in line 27.
Claim 43 recites the limitation "the actuators" in line 29. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 43 recites "wherein the end-effector includes a belt and a pivoting idler assembly" in line 36. It is unclear if "a belt" is of the "one or more belts" previously introduced in line 12 or if this recitation includes another belt in the system. Thus, the metes and bounds of this recitation cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 43 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 43 is being further examined as though "wherein the end-effector includes a belt and a pivoting idler assembly" reads "wherein the end-effector includes a pivoting idler assembly" in line 36, and as though "wherein the belt" reads "wherein a belt of the one or more belts" in line 38.
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 1-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frei et al. (US 2020/0015401; hereinafter referred to as "Frei") in view of Newlin et al. (US 2018/0179735; hereinafter referred to as "Newlin").
Regarding claim 1, Frei discloses an object collection system for collecting small objects off of a ground surface, the system including:
a mounting frame (see annotated Fig. A, below) having a vehicle attachment point that attaches to a ground vehicle (as 2500 is attached to a vehicle 2510 as described in para. 0329);
a mechanical arm assembly (including 2550 or body of 2550) with multiple degrees of freedom that is configured to pick up small objects off of the ground surface (see para. 0338), the mechanical arm assembly having a proximal end (attached to 2800) and a distal end (attached to the pivot assembly identified in annotated Fig. A);
a rail and carriage assembly (including the rails and carriage identified in annotated Fig. A, below) that supports the mechanical arm assembly and that enables movement of the mechanical arm assembly laterally with respect to a direction of travel of the ground vehicle (see para. 0337), wherein the rail and carriage assembly is attached to the mounting frame (see annotated Fig. A);
a pivot assembly (see annotated Fig. A) located at a connection of the rail and carriage assembly and the distal end of the mechanical arm assembly that enables the proximal end of the mechanical arm assembly to raise and lower vertically from the ground surface to pick up small objects (see paras. 0337-0338);
a receptacle (2600) for holding small objects picked up by the mechanical arm assembly (see para. 0339);
an end-effector (including 2820 and/or 2840 of 2800) positioned at the proximal end of the mechanical arm assembly that grasps and acquires small objects from the ground surface (see para. 0333);
one or more actuators (including those identified in annotated Fig. A) connected to the system; and
an input device (including 2700) that provides control input to actuate (via 3000 and 3100) the multiple degrees of freedom of the mechanical arm assembly and to actuate (via 3000 and 3100) the end-effector, wherein the control input controls electrical or hydraulic control signals (by identifying an object to be picked up and guiding the system to said object, such that 3000 and 3100 are activated to produce such control signals instructing the system to pick up said object) to drive the one or more actuators in the object collection system (see paras. 0340 and 0343);
a controller that provides operator control input (from memory, memories, computer-readable storage medium or media, cameras, and/or sensors) to actuate the multiple degrees of freedom of the mechanical arm assembly and to actuate the end-effector, wherein the controller controls electrical or hydraulic control signals to drive the one or more actuators in the system (see paras. 0340-0345, where actuation of the end-effector is described in paras. 0337-0338);
wherein the controller receives operator input (from memory, memories, computer-readable storage medium or media, cameras, and/or sensors) that triggers combined automation of the mechanical arm assembly, one or more paddles (including 2820, 2840) of the end-effector, and one or more belts (2846) on one or more paddles of the end-effector, to control timing of reach and pick actions of the mechanical arm assembly, and the alignment of the system with a small object to be picked while the ground vehicle is in motion (see paras. 0340-0345, where movement to pick up objects is further described in paras. 0337-0338).
The recitation of "while the ground vehicle is in motion" is interpreted broadly since a direction of motion and movement of the system relative thereto are not set forth. As such, Frei is considered to teach the combined automation while the ground vehicle is in motion because Frei discloses employing tracked movement of the object to instruct the object picker to pick up the object in combination with guiding the object collection system. (See Frei, para. 0343 and claims 1, 27, and 28 of Frei.)
PNG
media_image1.png
600
800
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A. Annotated Fig. 39 of Frei et al. (US 2020/0015401)
One skilled in the art would recognize that the controller of Frei receives user input (from stored instructions and/or to turn the controller on and off), but Frei does not explicitly disclose that a user input device including an actuation button as claimed. Newlin teaches a system comprising a user input device (including 500) for a controller (490), wherein the user input device including an actuation button (see paras. 0025-0026) that provides operator control input (from 500) from an operator on a ground vehicle to actuate an implement, wherein the user input controls electrical or hydraulic control signals to drive electric or hydraulic actuators in the system (see para. 0025), and wherein the user input device receives operator input via an actuation button that triggers automation through the controller (see paras. 0026-0027).
Newlin is analogous because Newlin teaches a system for controlling a ground-engaging implement mounted to the front of a ground vehicle. 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 system of Frei with the user input means as taught by Newlin in order to reduce hydraulic system complexity. (See Newlin, para. 0002.)
Regarding claim 2, Frei discloses two or more paddle components (including 2820) with one or more moving belts (2846) on each of the two or more paddle components.
Regarding claim 3, Frei discloses the one or more moving belts (2846) on each of the two or more paddle components of the end-effector moving to pull the objects in between the two or more paddle components (see para. 0333).
Regarding claim 4, Frei discloses the two or more paddle components of the end-effector including multiple joints (including 2830 and/or those of 2850) which enable repositioning of an object after the object has been picked up (see para. 0333).
Regarding claim 5, Frei discloses the two or more paddle components of the end-effector including three paddle components (including 2840), and wherein at least one of the three paddle components includes a hinge (including 2850) that enables an object to be pinched (see para. 0333).
Regarding claim 6, Frei discloses the two or more paddle components of the end-effector including three paddle components (including 2840), wherein a first two of the paddle components are fixed in position with respect to each other (2840s not on 2850 being fixed as shown in Figs. 39), and a third of the paddle components is spaced apart from the first two of the paddle components, and wherein the third of the paddle components includes a hinge (including 2850) that enables an object to be pinched (see para. 0333).
Regarding claim 7, Frei discloses the end-effector being initially positioned a height distance above the ground surface, and wherein the end-effector is moveable towards the ground surface by actuating one or more of the multiple degrees of freedom of the mechanical arm assembly to pick up small objects off of the ground surface (see paras. 0333-0334 and 0337-0338).
Regarding claim 8, Frei discloses the mechanical arm assembly (including 2550 or body of 2550) being extendable (see para. 0338), enabling the end-effector at the proximal end of the mechanical arm assembly to move away from the receptacle and towards a small object to be picked on the ground surface, and wherein the mechanical arm assembly is retractable, enabling the end-effector at the proximal end of the mechanical arm assembly to move towards the receptacle and away from the ground surface after the small object has been picked up (see para. 0338). Further, Frei discloses 2850 being extendable away from the receptacle and retractable towards the receptacle (see para. 0333 and Fig. 39).
Regarding claim 9, Frei discloses the receptacle (2600) being integrated with the mechanical arm assembly (see Fig. 39), enabling the receptacle to provide structural strength to the system in addition of small object carrying capacity, while moving the center of gravity close to the ground vehicle.
Regarding claim 10, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 1, Newlin teaches the user input device (including 500) being a joy stick (see para. 0025).
Regarding claim 11, Frei discloses the system triggering combined functions of the mechanical arm assembly and the end-effector that are programmed into the system (see para. 0343, where movement to pick up objects is described in paras. 0337-0338). Further, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 1, Newlin teaches the user input device being an actuation button (see para. 0025).
Regarding claim 12, Frei discloses the combined functions of the mechanical arm assembly and the end-effector that are programmed into the system being a reaching action of the mechanical arm assembly (see paras. 0031 and 0337-0338) and a picking action of the end-effector (additionally see para. 0333).
Regarding claim 13, Frei discloses combined functions of the mechanical arm assembly and the end-effector being on memory (see paras. 0343-0345), which one skilled in art would recognize as reprogrammable. Additionally, the examiner has taken Official Notice that it is old and well known in the art for memory within control systems to be reprogrammable, and 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 above combination with reprogrammable means in order to adapt the system to different environments and/or requirements.
Regarding claim 14, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 1, Newlin teaches the user input device including a joystick and an actuation button (see para. 0025), and wherein multiple combinations of combined functions are associated with the actuation button touch and release, and joystick motion (see paras. 0026-0027).
Regarding claim 16, Frei discloses a control system including a processor (3000) and a memory (3100) storing computer instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
receive input (see para. 0343) to move the carriage (see annotated Fig. A, above) along the rail and carriage assembly (see para. 0343, where movement to pick up objects is described in paras. 0337-0338); and
send instructions to the one or more actuators to move the carriage along the rail and carriage assembly (see para. 0343, where movement to pick up objects is described in paras. 0337-0338). Additionally, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 1, Newlin teaches input being operator input (see para. 0025).
Regarding claim 17, Frei discloses a control system including a processor (3000) and a memory (3100) storing computer instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
receive input (see para. 0343) to move the mechanical arm assembly (see para. 0343, where movement to pick up objects is described in paras. 0337-0338); and
send instructions to the one or more actuators to move one or more segments of the mechanical arm assembly within one, two, or three degrees of freedom and position the end-effector (see para. 0343, where movement to pick up objects is described in paras. 0337-0338). Additionally, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 1, Newlin teaches input being operator input (see para. 0025).
Regarding claim 18, Frei discloses a control system including a processor (3000) and a memory (3100) storing computer instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
receive input (see para. 0343) to move the one or more paddles of the end-effector (see para. 0343, where movement to pick up objects is described in paras. 0337-0338); and
send instructions to the one or more actuators to move the one or more paddles of the end-effector (see para. 0343, where movement to pick up objects is described in paras. 0337-0338). Additionally, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 1, Newlin teaches input being operator input (see para. 0025).
Regarding claim 19, Frei discloses a control system including a processor (3000) and a memory (3100) storing computer instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
receive input (see para. 0343) to move the one or more belts (2846) on the one or more paddles of the end-effector (see paras. 0343-0344, where movement to pick up objects is further described in paras. 0337-0338); and
send instructions to the one or more actuators to move the one or more belts (2846) on the one or more paddles of the end-effector (see paras. 0343-0344, further where movement to pick up objects is further described in paras. 0337-0338). Additionally, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 1, Newlin teaches input being operator input (see para. 0025).
Regarding claim 20, Frei discloses a control system including a processor (3000) and a memory (3100) storing computer instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
receive input (see para. 0343) that triggers combined functions to move two or more of (1) the mechanical arm assembly, (2) the one or more paddles of the end-effector, and (3) the one or more belts on the one or more paddles of the end-effector (see paras. 0343-0344, where movement to pick up objects is further described in paras. 0337-0338); and
send instructions to the one or more actuators to move two or more of (1) the mechanical arm assembly, (2) the one or more paddles of the end-effector, and (3) the one or more belts on the one or more paddles of the end-effector (see paras. 0343-0344, where movement to pick up objects is further described in paras. 0337-0338). Additionally, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 1, Newlin teaches input being operator input from an activation button (see para. 0025).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frei in view of Newlin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wood et al. (US 2004/0102136; hereinafter "Wood")
Regarding claim 15, neither Frei nor Newlin explicitly discloses the mechanical arm assembly including a slot and spring assembly as claimed. Wood teaches a system comprising a mechanical arm assembly (including 42, 104, 106) and an end-effector (including 110), wherein the mechanical arm assembly includes a slot and spring assembly (see Figs. 3A, 3B) that provide flexibility in the mechanical arm assembly that prevent damage due to the end-effector impacting an immoveable object.
Wood is analogous because Wood discloses a system having a mechanical arm assembly and the control thereof. 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 above combination with the slot and spring means as taught by Wood in order to preserve the system (see para. 0020).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21 and 27-37 are allowed.
Claims 22-26, 38, 39, and 43 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/9/2025 with respect to claims 21 and 43 have been fully considered. As set forth above, claims 21 would be allowable if amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Applicant's arguments filed 1/9/2025 with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With respect to claim 1, Frei and Newlin are considered to teach the claim limitations as explained in the rejection above.
Specifically, Applicant argues: "However, the Office Action has failed to show that Frei discloses (1) an actuation button that triggers combined automation of the various components, and (2) that the combined automation includes controlling the timing of reach and pick actions of the mechanical arm assembly." (See Remarks of 9/17/2025, labeled p. 15, emphasis Applicant’s.)
First, in response to Applicant's arguments against the references individually (e.g., against Frei for not disclosing an actuation button), 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).
Second, Applicant's argument is unpersuasive because Frei discloses a controller that triggers combined automation of the various components and that the combined automation includes controlling the timing of reach and pick actions of the mechanical arm assembly. In para. 0343, Frei sets forth the controller carries out a function to "employ the tracked movement of the target object to instruct the object-collection system to pick up the target object." Further, Frei states: "By employing three paddle components 2840, and one or more rotating belts 2846 on each paddle component, the object picking assembly 2800 is able to pinch, re-orient, and manipulate objects during a collection process." (See Frei, para. 0344.) Additionally, Frei describes: "one or more object picking assemblies 2800 are movably connected to the bucket 2600 for extension and retraction, enabling the one or more object picking assemblies 2800 to move towards the ground with respect to the bucket 2600 in picking up objects 2810." (See Frei, para. 0337.) One skilled in the art would recognize that the controller carries out combined automation, which includes controlling timing, to function as disclosed. Otherwise, the system of Frei would fail to function as described (and claimed). Applicant’s further arguments against para. 0343 of Frei fail to consider the paragraph in context and fail to consider the reference as a whole.
Finally, in response to Applicant's arguments against Newlin 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).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joel F. Mitchell whose telephone number is (571)272-7689. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6:00.
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, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at (571)272-0547. 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.
/JFM/2/21/26
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671