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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/10/22 was filed and the submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 19, 21-24, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SUN et al. (US 2021/0129355).
[AltContent: textbox (Finger barb)]RE claim 19, SUN et al. (US 2021/0129355) discloses a gripper (see Figs. 1-9), comprising: a gripper body (see Fig. 7) comprising a finger connecting portion (61, 60); and at least two fingers (62, 62) connected to the finger connecting portion, wherein the gripper body further comprises a gripper cavity therein (See Fig. 9) (See Exhibit A); wherein the finger connecting portion and the at least two fingers define a working space therewithin, the working space comprises an opening (see Fig. 9) between proximal ends of the at least two fingers; and wherein each of the at least two fingers further comprises a finger barb (See Exhibit A) substantially extending into the opening to partially close up the opening.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]Exhibit A
[AltContent: textbox (Arc-shape finger connecting wall)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Working space with an opening)][AltContent: textbox (Gripper cavity)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
RE claim 21, Fig. 9 of SUN et al. Gripper (US 2021/0129355) teaches the gripper cavity substantially extends into the finger connecting portion, and the at least two fingers (63) are substantially solid.
RE claim 22, Fig. 9 of SUN et al. Gripper (US 2021/0129355) shows that the finger connecting portion comprises at least one side wall and a finger connecting wall that together define the gripper cavity (see Exhibit A), the at least one side wall is configured to be thicker than the finger connecting wall (see Fig. 7) wherein the finger connecting wall is arc-shaped (see Exhibit A).
RE claim 24, Fig. 9 of SUN et al. Gripper (US 2021/0129355) discloses that the at least two fingers are equidistantly spaced relative to a central longitudinal axis of the gripper.
RE claim 26, Fig. 9 of SUN et al. Gripper (US 2021/0129355) shows that the finger gap is substantially larger than width of each of the at least two fingers.
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, 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 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUN et al. Gripper (US 2021/0129355) in view of de Sivry et al. (4,410,210).
SUN et al. Gripper (US 2021/0129355), as presented above, does not specifically show the at least two fingers and the gripper body are casted as a single piece made of one or more elastomer materials. However, de Sivry et al. (4,410,210) teaches the grippers being made of an elastomer material (see Claim 1). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide an elastomer material on the at least two fingers and the gripper body of SUN et al. Gripper (US 2021/0129355) as taught by de Sivry et al. (4,410,210) to provide a soft grip on the object or workpiece preventing from being damaged.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUN et al. Gripper (US 2021/0129355).
SUN et al. Gripper (US 2021/0129355), as presented above, does not specifically show the specific structural dimension of a ratio of length of the finger connecting portion to length of the at least two fingers is substantially equal to or smaller than 1:1. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to optimize the specific structural dimension on the SUN et al. Gripper (US 2021/0129355) to be suitable to firmly and effectively grasp the target object.
Claim 19-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (US 2019/0358832) in view of Pearson (4,809,898).
RE claim 19, ZHANG (US 2019/0358832) discloses a gripper (see Figs. 1-12), comprising: a gripper body (see Figs. 8-10) comprising a finger connecting portion (2); and at least two fingers (11, 11) (see paragraph [0038]) connected to the finger connecting portion, wherein the gripper body further comprises a gripper cavity therein (See Figs. 8-10); wherein the finger connecting portion and the at least two fingers define a working space therewithin, the working space comprises an opening between proximal ends of the at least two fingers,” but does not specifically show a finger barb substantially extending into the opening to partially close up the opening. However, Fig. 1 of Pearson (4,809,898) teaches two fingers wherein a finger barb substantially extending into the opening to partially close up the opening. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a slight protruding feature or a finger barb on the fingers of ZHANG’s Gripper (US 2019/0358832) as taught by Pearson (4,809,898) to firmly secure the grasped object to a user.
RE claim 20, ZHANG’s Gripper (US 2019/0358832) is being made of one or more elastomer materials (see para [0038]).
RE claims 21-23, Figs. 8-10 of ZHANG’s Gripper (US 2019/0358832) shows that the gripper cavity substantially extends into the finger connecting portion, and the at least two fingers (11, 11) are substantially solid and the finger connecting portion comprises at least one side wall and a finger connecting wall that together define the gripper cavity, the at least one side wall is configured to be thicker than the finger connecting wall (see Figs. 8-10) wherein the finger connecting wall is arc-shaped (see Fig. 6).
RE claim 25, ZHANG’s Gripper (US 2019/0358832), as presented above, does not specifically show the specific structural dimension of a ratio of length of the finger connecting portion to length of the at least two fingers is substantially equal to or smaller than 1:1. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to optimize the specific structural dimension on the ZHANG’s Gripper (US 2019/0358832) to be suitable to firmly and effectively grasp the target object.
RE claims 24 and 26, Figs. 8-10 of ZHANG’s Gripper (US 2019/0358832) disclose that the at least two fingers are equidistantly spaced relative to a central longitudinal axis of the gripper wherein the finger gap is substantially larger than width of each of the at least two fingers’ tips.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-18 are allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL T CHIN whose telephone number is (571)272-6922. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-4:30 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, Gene Crawford can be reached on (571) 272-6911. 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.
/PAUL T CHIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651