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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 12, 2022 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the expansion and contraction" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the expansion of the portion" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the expansion" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the expansion and contraction" in line 9 and “the expansion of the portion” in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the expansion" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 (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 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 1-2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Robertson (US 5,245,885).
As to claim 1, Robertson discloses a deformable gripper (21,40), as illustrated in Figures 1-5, comprising a base (12), a first inner membrane (25) and a second inner membrane (26) coupled to the base, an outer membrane (42) attached to the base such that the outer membrane is positioned to enclose the first inner membrane and the second inner membrane, and an actuator (28,29) operable to independently expand and contract the first inner membrane and the second inner membrane such that a portion of an outer surface of the outer membrane expands and contracts responsive to the expansion and contraction of at least one of the first inner membrane and the second inner membrane (inflating one of the bladders 25 and 26 to a greater degree than the other. This is illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4, where the bladder 26 is inflated to different degrees. – see Figures 3-4 and col. 2, lines 10-14).
With claim 2, an expansion of the portion of the outer membrane is based on at least one of the first inner membrane and the second inner membrane contacting an inner surface of the outer membrane that is associated with the portion.
With claim 6, Robertson discloses the outer membrane, but does not disclose “a pattern embedded” on the outer membrane. However, the embedded pattern is considered ornamentation only and serves no mechanical function. Therefore, it is not considered to be patentably distinct over the prior art.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robertson (US 5,245,885) in view of Lessing et al (US 10,173,328).
As to claim 12, Robertson discloses a deformable gripper (21,40), as illustrated in Figures 1-5, comprising a base (12), a first inner membrane (25) and a second inner membrane (26) coupled to the base, an outer membrane (42) attached to the base such that the outer membrane is positioned to enclose the first inner membrane and the second inner membrane, and an actuator (28,29) operable to independently expand and contract the first inner membrane and the second inner membrane such that a portion of an outer surface of the outer membrane expands and contracts responsive to the expansion and contraction of at least one of the first inner membrane and the second inner membrane (inflating one of the bladders 25 and 26 to a greater degree than the other. This is illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4, where the bladder 26 is inflated to different degrees. – see Figures 3-4 and col. 2, lines 10-14). An expansion of the portion of the outer membrane is based on at least one of the first inner membrane and the second inner membrane contacting an inner surface of the outer membrane that is associated with the portion. However, Robertson does not show a camera.
Lessing et al teaches a gripper (402a,402b) each having a sensor (406) including a camera (see Figure 4 and col. 8, lines 36-37).
To provide the device of Robertson with a sensor including a camera to the gripper would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teachings of Lessing et al, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, i.e., one skilled in the art would have recognized that the sensor including a camera used in Lessing et al would allow the positioning of the gripper with respect to an object to be grasped.
With claim 14, each of the outer membrane and the first inner membrane and the second inner membrane are independently expandable via a port (see annotated Figure 2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
360
291
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3-5,7-11,13, and 15-20 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Arrichiello, Ono, Lessing’992, Curhan, and Seto are cited as being relevant art, because each prior art discloses a deformable gripping comprising a base and a membrane.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 am - 4:30 pm EST.
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 at (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 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.
STEPHEN VU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3651
/STEPHEN A VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651