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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group II, readable on claims 1-10. 19, and 20, in the reply filed on Dec 18, 2025, is acknowledged
Claims 11-15, 17, and 18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Note that applicant canceled the dependent claim 16, filed April 8, 2026. Applicant also add new claim 21 with new structural elements, filed April 8, 2026.
Specification
Applicant provides a descriptive tittle, filed April 8, 2026, which has been approved to enter by the Examiner.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Declerck et al. (US 2020/0276714).
Declerck et al. (US 2020/0276714) discloses a robotic cell (See Figs. 1-27) comprising: a workstation (see Fig. 1) (see Exhibit A) adapted to receive at least one workpiece; a tool support (6, 20, 16, 16) (see Fig. 1) comprising at least one tool (18, 84); and a robot (24) comprising: a robot base (28) positioned proximate the workstation; a robot arm (14, 24) operatively coupled to the robot base and being displaceable in a 3D environment of the workstation (see para [0044] [0045]), the robot arm having a free end; and a robot end effector (26) operatively coupled to the free end and comprising a gripper (48, 50) adapted to selectively seize and release the at least one tool from the tool support and the at least one workpiece; the tool support being within reach of the gripper, the robot being operable to manipulate and position the workpiece within the workstation using the gripper and perform a predetermined operation on or around the workpiece using the tool held by the gripper. Exhibit A
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 8, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 (Declerck et al. (US 2020/0276714)
Claim 1
Applicant argues that “The Office Action appears to treat Declerck's "physical objects" as the claimed "tool," and Declerck's container and/or surfaces as the claimed "tool support." That mapping is improper because it collapses distinct claimed roles and omits the required use relationship. Claim 1 requires a staged tool on a tool support and requires the robot to perform an operation on or around the workpiece using that held tool. Declerck's "physical objects 16, 18" are the items being gripped and moved; they are not disclosed as tools used to perform operations on a workpiece. Likewise, Declerck's "container 20" is a destination receptacle for deposited objects, not a tool support holding a tool for later seizure and use on a workpiece. The Office Action's relabeling therefore does not establish disclosure of all claim elements arranged as set forth in claim 1. For at least these reasons, Declerck does not disclose the claimed "tool support comprising at least one tool," nor does Declerck disclose the robot being operable to "perform a predetermined operation on or around the workpiece using the tool held by the gripper." The Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102.” (see Page 10).
The Examiner disagrees with applicant’s arguments.
It is pointed out that the physical objects (16, 18) stated in paragraphs [0004] [0009] [0010] and [0044] by Declerck et al. (US 2020/0276714) and as shown Fig. 1
[0003] In general terms the present disclosure is directed to improved systems and methods for handling physical objects with a robot, as well as improvements in the physical objects themselves.
[0004] Robots are used in many industries and applications to handle objects and move them from one place to another. The process can be referred to as “pick and place”, whereby the robot picks up an object from a first location and places or deposits the object in a second location. For example, pick and place robots are used in warehouses and other product fulfillment centers where items are packaged for distribution. Pick and place robots are also used for assembling parts in the manufacture of products, such as automobiles, furniture, electronics, machinery, etc. Pick and place robots are also used in other applications, such as in laboratories (e.g., biotechnology and chemistry laboratories), for repair and retrieval operations where human access is difficult or dangerous (e.g., in space, underground, and under water), in medical settings (e.g., robotically performed or partially robotically performed surgery), etc. These examples are just a few of a vast number of applications and contexts in which robotic picking and placing is used or may be used in the future.
Declerck et al. (US 2020/0276714) describes physical objects as broadly as “Pick and place robots are also used for assembling parts in the manufacture of products, such as automobiles, furniture, electronics, machinery, etc.” as in paragraph [0004]. A “tool” is under the categories of “physical objects.” The meaning of “a tool” is defined as “any physical object or digital instrument used to perform a specific task, facilitate manual labor, or achieve a desired goal” according to Merriam-Webster Dictionary.
The Examiner also disagrees with applicant’s argument that “Declerck disclose the robot being operable to "perform a predetermined operation on or around the workpiece using the tool held by the gripper.”
Declerck et al. (US 2020/0276714) discloses clearly with many examples about to perform a predetermined operation on or around the workpiece using the tool held by the gripper.
Declerck et al. (US 2020/0276714) describes one controller (52), an interface (54), a processor (56) (see Fig. 1), optic module (60), robot control module (62) and other sensors to perform a predetermined operation on or around the workpiece.
[0050] The robot 14 includes at least one controller 52. The at least one controller 52 is operatively linked (e.g., via the network 22) to the operating subsystem 12. Signals provided by the operating subsystem 12 are transmitted to the controller 52 and vice versa. The controller 52 outputs control signals to control movement of the robot 14, including, e.g., all of the robot's actuators. In addition the controller 52 can provide operational information about the robot 14 to the operating subsystem 12.
[0051] The operating subsystem 12 includes in input/output interface 54, one or more processors 56, and non-transitory storage 58 (e.g., one or more databases and/or other forms of non-transitory memory). The storage 58 has stored thereon computer-readable instructions. At least some of the computer-readable instructions can be organized as modules executable by the one or more processors 56 to perform certain functions. The storage 58 also stores data that can be read from and written to, such as look-up tables used by the one or more processors 56 in conjunction with the computer readable instructions.
The applicant’s reasonings on the claim rejection under 103 have been fully persuasive. Therefore, the previously rejected under 103 have been withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-21 are allowed.
Claims 2-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 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, Robert Hodge, can be reached on (571) 272-2097. 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 3654
Prosecution Insights