DETAILED ACTION
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 § 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 1-2, 4-5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akamatsu et al. US 20190270472 A1.
Regarding independent claim 1, a first embodiment of Akamatsu et al. discloses [a carrier device comprising a coupling mechanism that couples an automatic controlled vehicle 10 to a carriage C,] (Fig. 12; Paragraph 0086)
the [coupling mechanism comprising:
a first shaft member CCa including a first roller portion CCa2 and a second shaft member CCb including a second roller portion CCa2, the first shaft member and second shaft member being disposed on the carriage with an interval therebetween in a horizontal direction and extending downward from the carriage;] (Fig. 12; Paragraph 0086)
[a guide rail section 260 provided on the automatic controlled vehicle and including a pair of rail members 262, 263 extending in the horizontal direction so as to define a gap between the pair of rail members, the guide rail section inhibiting the automatic controlled vehicle and the carriage from moving in a width direction relative to each other in a state where the first roller portion and the second roller portion are received in the gap;] (Fig. 12; Paragraph 0100 & 102; Akamatsu et al. discloses that when the trolley C2 is moved rearward relative to the automatic guided vehicle, the shaft section CCb comes into contact with the side surface 223b of the connecting main body section 223, thus suppressing relative movement between the vehicle and carriage in the entering X direction. This contact inhibits movement between the vehicle and the carriage in the width direction.)
[a lock member 222, 223 provided on the automatic controlled vehicle so as to be selectively movable between a first position and a second position,] (Fig. 12; Paragraph 0103) whereby [the lock member inhibits the automatic controller vehicle and the carriage from moving in a back-and-forth direction relative to each other;] (Fig. 11 & 12; Paragraph 0102; Akamatsu et al. discloses that when the trolley C2 is moved forward or rearward relative to the automatic guided vehicle, the roller portions of the shaft sections CCa, CCb come into contact with the side surfaces 223a, 223b of the connecting main body section 223. This contact inhibits relative movement in the Y direction (back-and-forth direction).) and
[an actuator 230 which moves the lock member between the first position and the second position,] (Fig. 12; Paragraph 0096; Akamatsu et al. discloses an actuator that moves an output shaft 231 that is linked to the locking member 223.)
wherein;
[the lock member includes a first side surface 223a and a second side surface 223b, the first side surface and the second side surface each extending along a direction of movement of the lock member, and] (Fig. 12; Paragraph 0115 of first embodiment; Akamatsu et al. discloses protrusions 224a, 224b that protrude from a left and right end portion of the connecting main body section 223. As shown in Fig. 12 these protrusions have side surfaces 223a, 223b that move along the direction of the lock member.) and [the first side surface faces the first roller portion and the second side surface faces the second roller portion.] (Fig. 12; As shown in Fig. 12, Akamatsu illustrates the first and second side surfaces 223a, 223b facing the first and second roller portions CCa, CCb.)
The first embodiment of Akamatsu et al. does not disclose a third shaft member including third roller portion CCa2, the third shaft member being disposed on the carriage between the first roller portion and the second roller portion and extending downward from the carriage;
the lock member being separated from the third roller portion when moved in the first position, and fitted with the third roller portion when moved to the second position; the first side surface and second side surface of the lock member being parallel to each other, and a state wherein the third roller portion is fitted into the recessed portion.
A second embodiment of Akamatsu et al. teaches [a third shaft member CCc including a third roller portion CCa2, the third shaft member being disposed on the carriage between the first roller portion and the second roller portion and extending downward from the carriage;] (Fig. 13; Paragraph 0118; As shown in Fig. 13, Akamatsu et al. illustrates the third shaft member being disposed in a portion between the first and second shaft members.)
[a lock member 322, 323 being separated from the third roller portion when moved in the first position, and fitted with the third roller portion when moved to the second position;] (Fig. 13-14; Paragraph 0120)
[wherein the lock member 322 includes a fitting portion comprising a recess portion 323a fitting with the third roller portion.] (Fig. 14; Paragraph 0120 of second embodiment)
and [the actuator 230 which moves the lock member between the first position and the second position;] (Fig. 13-14; As shown in Fig. 13, Akamatsu et al. illustrates an actuator that moves an output shaft 231 that is linked to the locking member 323.) [the first side surface and second side surface of the lock member being parallel to each other] (Annotated Fig. 14; As shown in annotation of Fig. 14, below Akamatsu et al. illustrates wherein the first and second side surfaces of the lock member 323 are parallel to each other) [a state wherein the third roller portion is fitted into the recessed portion.] (Fig. 13 -14; Paragraph 0123)
PNG
media_image1.png
713
564
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 14 of Second Embodiment
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the first embodiment of Akamatsu et al. with the second embodiment of Akamatsu et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for a secure and efficient coupling mechanism between the automatic controlled vehicle and the automatic controlled vehicle and the carriage while maintaining structural integrity and operational reliability. (Paragraph 0126; Akamatsu explicitly states that “The configurations may be appropriately combined within a range in which they are not mutually inconsistent.”. This indicates that the third and second embodiments can be integrated without introducing inconsistencies. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine these embodiments to achieve the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success.)
Regarding claim 2, Akamatsu et al. further teaches wherein
[the first roller portion CCa2 rotates around a first axis extending along a vertical direction,] (Fig. 10; Paragraph 0088 of first embodiment; Akamatsu et al. discloses a roller portion that is attached to a lower portion of the first shaft member and is rotatable around an axis of the shaft section extending in the vertical direction.)
[the second roller portion CCa2 rotates around a second axis extending along the vertical direction, and] (Fig. 10; Paragraph 0114 of first embodiment; Akamatsu et al. discloses that the shaft section connected to the second shaft member includes a roller portion.)
[the third roller portion CCa2 rotates around a third axis extending along the vertical direction.] (Fig. 13-14; Paragraph 0118 of second embodiment; Akamatsu et al. discloses that the configuration of the shaft section that is connected to the third shaft member CCc is the same as the first shaft member CCa, which includes a roller portion CCa2.)
Regarding claim 4, Akamatsu et al. further teaches [wherein
the guide rail section 260 comprises:
straight portions that form longitudinal parts of the pair of rail members 262, 263 and are parallel to each other;] (Fig. 12; 0090 of first embodiment)
[a first expanding portion in which the gap expands as a distance from a first end of the straight portions increases; and] (Fig. 12; Paragraph 0090 of first embodiment; As shown in Fig. 12, Akamatsu et al. illustrates a first expanding portion with a gap that expands as a distance from one end of the straight portions increases.)
[a second expanding portion in which the gap expands as a distance from a second end of the straight portion increases.] (Fig. 12 of first embodiment; As shown in Fig. 12, Akamatsu et al. illustrates a second expanding portion with a gap that expands as a distance from one end of the straight portions increases.)
Regarding claim 5, Akamatsu et al. further teaches wherein the lock member 222, 223 further includes:
[an end portion including a pair of guide surfaces 223a, 223b, a distance between the pair of guide surfaces decreasing from the first and second side surfaces toward an end surface of the lock member.] (Fig. 12; Paragraph 0098 of first embodiment)
Regarding claim 7, Akamatsu et al. further teaches wherein:
[the fitting portion 322 comprises the recess portion 323a and an opening, a width of the opening being larger than a width of the recess portion,] (Annotated Fig. 13 of second embodiment below; Paragraph 0120 of second embodiment) and [the opening being open to an end surface of the lock member,] (Annotated Fig. 13 of second embodiment; Paragraph 0120 of second embodiment) and
[the recess portion comprises a first inner face 323b and a second inner face 323c each extending along the guide portion and facing each other so as to define a second gap,] (Annotated Fig. 13 of second embodiment; Paragraph 0120 of second embodiment) [the third roller portion being received between the first inner face and the second inner face of the second gap.] (Fig. 14 of second embodiment; Paragraph 0120 of second embodiment; As shown in Fig. 14, the second embodiment of Akamatsu et al. illustrates the third roller portion CCc being received between the first inner face 323b and the second inner face 323c of the second gap.)
PNG
media_image2.png
763
828
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 13 of Second Embodiment
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akamatsu et al. in view of Nakamura et al. US 10589640 B2.
Regarding claim 3, Akamatsu et al. further teaches [a diameter of the first roller portion and a diameter of the second roller portion being equivalent to each other.] (Fig. 11; Paragraph 0087 of first embodiment; Akamatsu et al. discloses that the first shaft member and the second shaft member have the same configuration except that they are disposed in different positions from each other, thus inherently implying that they have correlating diameters. Additionally, as shown in Fig. 11, the first and second shaft members are illustrated to have the same shape and size in diameter.)
Akamatsu et al. does not disclose wherein the first roller portion, the second roller portion and the third roller portion are each made of a material having rubber elasticity.
Nakamura et al. teaches [wherein the first roller portion, the second roller portion and the third roller portion are each made of a material having rubber elasticity.] (Fig. 3B; Col. 9, Lines 42 – 47; Nakamura et al. discloses resin or rubber rollers being employed as the rollers.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the rubber rollers of Nakamura et al. instead of the roller portions of Akamatsu et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for increased friction for secure engagement, reduced slippage between coupled components, and absorbed mechanical vibrations, thus improving the durability and operational stability of the coupling mechanism.
Akamatsu et al., as modified above, does not explicitly teach that a diameter of the third roller portion is less than the diameter of the first roller portion and the diameter of the second roller portion. However, such an arrangement would have been an obvious matter of design choice. As stated in MPEP2144.04(IV)(A), changes in size/proportion are not patentable if it does not change the operation of the device. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955), size alone was found insufficient to distinguish an invention. Similarly, In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), relative dimensions were deemed obvious where they did not affect function.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that amended claim 1 requires simultaneous engagement of the three roller portions (two through side surfaces and one through a recessed portion), and the Akamatsu only discloses engagement of one or two shaft portions at a time. This argument is not persuasive. Akamatsu et al. discloses, across two embodiments, both side surface engagement (Fig. 11-12; side surfaces 223a, 223b engaging shaft portions CCa, CCb) and recess-based engagement (Fig. 13-14, recessed portion 323a engaging shaft portion CA3). The combination of these known engagement mechanisms would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to improve coupling stability, as it merely involves applying known techniques to achieve predictable results.)
Applicant argues that there is not teaching or suggestion in Akamatsu to combine the embodiments of Fig. 11-12 and Fig. 13-14. This argument is not persuasive. In paragraph [0126], Akamatsu explicitly teaches that “the configurations may be appropriately combined within a range in which they are not mutually inconsistent,” thereby providing express motivation to combine the disclosed embodiments. Since the side surface engagement and recess engagement configurations are not mutually exclusive and serve the common purpose of stabilizing the connection, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to combine these features with a reasonable expectation of success.
Applicant argues that the claimed lock member includes first and second side surfaces that are parallel and face respective roller portions, which is not disclosed in Akamatsu. This argument is not persuasive. Akamatsu et al. discloses in its first embodiment (Fig. 11-12) a connecting section 223 having first and second side surfaces 223a, 223 that face and engage corresponding shaft portions CCa, CCb, thus teaching the claimed feature of side surfaces facing respective roller portions. Additionally, the second embodiment (Fig. 13-14) discloses a connecting section 323 with opposing side surfaces that are parallel to each other, thereby teaching the claimed feature of parallel side surfaces. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine these teachings, as expressly suggest by Akamatsu’s statement that configurations may be appropriately combined where not mutually inconsistent (Paragraph [0126]), to arrive at a structure in which side surfaces both face corresponding roller portions and are parallel to each other.
Applicant argues that the claimed structure provides greater coupling strength and prevents rattling, unlike Akamatsu. This argument is not persuasive because these are intended advantages or results, which are not limiting unless explicitly recited in the claims. The prior art structure disclosed in Akamatsu already provides engagement between components to suppress relative movement, and any improvement in strength or reduction in rattling would have been an inherent result of increasing the number of contact points.
Applicant argues that Nakamura et al. does not disclose or suggest the newly recited features. This argument is not persuasive because the rejection does not rely on Nakamura to teach the primary structural features at issue. Rather, Akamatsu et al. alone teaches or suggests the claimed coupling structure, and Nakamura is cited for additional teachings as set forth in the rejection. Accordingly, the combination remains proper and does not affect the conclusion of obviousness.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohamed Medani whose telephone number is (703)756-1917. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at (571) 272-6265. 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.
/Mohamed M Medani/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights