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 .
Specification
The title of the invention (“High Flexibility Gripper”) is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: it appears in claim 7, line , that the word “synchronistically” should be changed to -- synchronically --. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-7, 12-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Golan et al. (10,464,218) in view of Magerl et al. (5,431,470).
RE claim 1, Golan et al. (10,464,218) discloses a gripper head, comprising:
a frame (5) (see Figs.1 & 2) (see Exhibit A) having a plurality of cantilever arms, an upper end, and a lower end opposite the upper end, with a vertical axis extending between the upper end and the lower end (see Figs.1 & 2); a plurality of discrete and spaced-apart tracks (see Figs.1 & 2) (see Col. 10, lines 19-39 and Col. 11, lines 8-16), each track extending out from the vertical axis and supporting a gripper finger (10, 10, 10) operable to move along the track between a first position and a second position, the second position being farther from the vertical axis than the first position, each track supported by a corresponding cantilever arm of the plurality of cantilever arms,” but does not specifically show a plurality of support bars, each support bar extending between two cantilever arms of the plurality of cantilever arms.
Exhibit A
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Magerl et al. (5,431,470) teaches a lifting assembly having a substantially V-shape lifting members (15 and 16) and a cross bar (40) with two ends wherein the ends are being attached or connected to the lifting members (15 and 16) to support and strengthen the lifting device. 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 supporting bar between the wide V-shape frames or beams (5, 5, 5) of Golan et al. (10,464,218) as taught by Magerl et al. (5,431,470) to support and strengthen the lifting device preventing buckling and collapsing when a heavy load is being lifted.
RE claims 17, it also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide other two bars (totaling three bars) between the wide V-shape frames or beams (5, 5, 5) of Golan et al. (10,464,218) as taught by Magerl et al. (5,431,470) to support and strengthen the lifting device preventing buckling and collapsing when a heavy load is being lifted.
RE claims 2-5, Figs. 1 and 2 of Golan et al. lifting device (10,464,218) teach each track includes a first end adjacent the vertical axis and a second end opposite the first end (see Fig. 2), the second end being farther from the vertical axis than the first end, wherein each track extends perpendicular to the vertical axis wherein the plurality of tracks extend in a common plane (See Figs. 1 and 2) wherein the tracks are equally spaced about the vertical axis.
RE claims 6 and 7, Figs. 1-4 of Golan et al. lifting device (10,464,218) disclose the first and second positions are radially spaced from the vertical axis, and the gripper head is configured as a chuck to hold a load gripped by the gripper fingers, wherein the gripper fingers (10, 10) are operable to be moved synchronically via a gear bevel (see Fig. 2).
RE claims 12, 13, and 20, Figs. 1 and 2 of Golan et al. lifting device (10,464,218) also show each track of the plurality of tracks includes a rail (7, 3) and the gripping finger is mounted to the rail to move along the rail, wherein each track of the plurality of tracks is a linear track, wherein the plurality of tracks is three tracks.
RE claim 14, Fig. 2 of Golan et al. lifting device (10,464,218) provides each track of the plurality of tracks includes a ball screw (7) driven by a motor (see Col. 10, lines 40-66).
RE claim 15, Golan et al. lifting device (10,464,218) teaches that each gripper finger is a force sensing finger to send the torque (see Col. 10, lines 40-66).
RE claims 18 and 19, Figs. 1-3C of Golan et al. lifting device (10,464,218) show each gripper finger includes a gripping surface wherein each gripper finger includes a first gripping surface directed towards the vertical axis and a second gripping surface directed away from the vertical axis (see Figs. 3A-3C).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Golan et al. (10,464,218) and Magerl et al. (5,431,470), and further in view of Brady et al. (10,751,882).
Golan et al. lifting device (10,464,218), as presented above, does not specifically show
a camera mounted on a support bar of the plurality of support bars. However, Fig. 1 of Brady et al. (10,751,882) teaches an optical sensor, or a camera (156) mounted on a bar (150, 152) (see Col. 5, lines 27-53). 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 camera to be mounted on the beam or support bar of Golan et al. (10,464,218) as taught by Brady et al. (10,751,882) to provide any information regarding the gripping environment to a user. It is pointed to those skilled in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a camera at any preferred location such as the modified bar or the beam of Golan et al. (10,464,218) to facilitate to monitor the status of the gripping operation.
Claims 1-9, 12, 13, 15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) in view of Magerl et al. (5,431,470).
RE claim 1, Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) discloses a gripper head (see Figs. 1-10), comprising: a frame (20) (see Figs.1 & 2) (see Exhibit B) having a plurality of cantilever arms, an upper end, and a lower end opposite the upper end, with a vertical axis extending between the upper end and the lower end (see Figs.1 & 2); a plurality of discrete and spaced-apart tracks (30, 30) (see Figs.1 & 2) (see para [0039] [0040]), each track extending out from the vertical axis and supporting a gripper finger (26, 26, 26, 42, 44) operable to move along the track between a first position (se Fig. 10C) and a second position (see Fig. 10a), the second position being farther from the vertical axis than the first position, each track supported by a corresponding cantilever arm of the plurality of cantilever arms,” but does not specifically show a plurality of support bars, each support bar extending between two cantilever arms of the plurality of cantilever arms.
Exhibit B
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Magerl et al. (5,431,470) teaches a lifting assembly having a substantially V-shape lifting members (15 and 16) and a cross bar (40) with two ends wherein the ends are being attached or connected to the lifting members (15 and 16) to support and strengthen the lifting device. 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 supporting bar between the wide V-shape frames or beams (20, 20, 20) of Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) as taught by Magerl et al. (5,431,470) to support and strengthen the lifting device preventing buckling and collapsing when a heavy load is being lifted.
RE claims 17, it also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide other two bars (totaling three bars) between the wide V-shape frames or beams (20, 20, 20) of Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) as taught by Magerl et al. (5,431,470) to support and strengthen the lifting device preventing buckling and collapsing when a heavy load is being lifted.
RE claims 2-5, Figs. 1 and 2 of Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) teach each track (30) includes a first end adjacent the vertical axis and a second end opposite the first end (see Fig. 2), the second end being farther from the vertical axis than the first end, wherein each track extends perpendicular to the vertical axis wherein the plurality of tracks extend in a common plane (See Figs. 1 and 2) wherein the tracks are equally spaced about the vertical axis.
RE claims 6 and 7, Figs. 1-4 of Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) disclose the first and second positions are radially spaced from the vertical axis, and the gripper head is configured as a chuck to hold a load gripped by the gripper fingers (22, 22, 22), wherein the gripper fingers are operable to be moved synchronically via a motor (24) (see Fig. 2).
RE claims 8 and 9, Figs. 1-4 of Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) disclose each gripper finger (26) is coupled to a corresponding drive unit of the plurality of drive units (28) to be moved by the drive unit wherein each drive unit is associated with a track of the plurality of tracks (30, 30), and the drive unit is secured to the frame at the second end of the associated track.
RE claims 12, 13, and 20, Figs. 1 and 2 of Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) also show each track of the plurality of tracks includes a guide rail (30, 30) and the gripping finger (26, 22) is mounted to the rail to move along the rail, wherein each track of the plurality of tracks is a linear track, wherein the plurality of tracks is three tracks.
RE claim 15, Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) teaches that each gripper finger is a force sensing finger to send the torque (see para [0052]).
RE claims 18 and 19, Figs. 1 and 2 of Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) show each gripper finger includes a gripping surface wherein each gripper finger includes a first gripping surface (42) directed towards the vertical axis and a second gripping surface (44) directed away from the vertical axis.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) and Magerl et al. (5,431,470), and further in view of Brady et al. (10,751,882).
Kitamura (US 2015/0123416, as presented above, does not specifically show
a camera mounted on a support bar of the plurality of support bars. However, Fig. 1 of Brady et al. (10,751,882) teaches an optical sensor, or a camera (156) mounted on a bar (150, 152) (see Col. 5, lines 27-53). 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 camera to be mounted on the beam or support bar of Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) as taught by Brady et al. (10,751,882) to provide any information regarding the gripping environment to a user. It is pointed to those skilled in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a camera at any preferred location such as the modified bar or the beam of Kitamura (US 2015/0123416) to facilitate to monitor the status of the gripping operation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 11 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Moore ‘364 discloses a supporting bar on the frame.
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
Specification
The title of the invention (“Articulated Clutch”) is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 12-14 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
There is no antecedent basis for “the second gripping portion” as recited in claims 12, 13, and 14. Note that the claims 12 and 13 depend on claim 10, but claim 10 recites only “a first ripping portion.”
Claims 2-10 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, rejected independent claim 1.
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 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by MacKay Sim (8,172,289) (See IDS).
MacKay Sim (8,172,289) discloses a lifting clutch device for lifting a concrete component, the clutch (see Exhibit A) comprising: a toroidal connector (115) (see Fig. 4A); a latch (115) movable relative to the toroidal connector from a disengaged condition to an engaged condition (See Figs. 4A-4C); and a coupler (101) configured to couple the toroidal connector to a lifting apparatus, wherein the coupler is articulated.
RE claim 7, Fig, 4B of MacKay Sim (8,172,289) teaches the latch (115) is a circular latch (117) passing through an inner circular passage (see Fig. 4C) of the toroidal connector.
Exhibit A
PNG
media_image3.png
200
400
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 2, 5, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacKay Sim (8,172,289) (see IDS) in view of Manney et al. (3,373,560).
MacKay Sim (8,172,289), as presented above, shows a lifting clutch device for lifting a concrete component, the clutch (see Exhibit A) comprising: a toroidal connector (115) (see Fig. 4A); a latch (115) movable relative to the toroidal connector from a disengaged condition to an engaged condition (See Figs. 4A-4C); and a coupler (101) configured to couple the toroidal connector to a lifting apparatus, wherein the coupler is articulated,
but does not specifically teach the coupler includes a first part and a second part pivotal relative to the first part about a pin, the first part including a first circular arc and the second part including a second circular arc, and wherein the pin is located such that a longitudinal axis of the pin is perpendicular to a line connecting a center of the first arc to a center of the second arc.
However, Figs. 1-8 of Manney et al. (3,373,560) teaches the coupler configured to couple the toroidal connector (141) to a lifting apparatus, wherein the coupler includes a first part (10) and a second part (12) pivotal relative to the first part about a pin (26), the first part including a first circular arc and the second part (see Exhibit B) including a second circular arc, and wherein the pin is located such that a longitudinal axis of the pin is perpendicular to a line connecting a center of the first arc to a center of the second arc.
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
or replace the single lifting shackle (102) of MacKay Sim (8,172,289) with the pivotal coupler (10 and 12) of Manney et al. (3,373,560) to provide flexibility and pivotal movement to a user.
Exhibit B
PNG
media_image4.png
200
400
media_image4.png
Greyscale
RE claims 5 and 6, MacKay Sim (8,172,289) shows that the second loop (10) is capable of directing fitment of a lifting chain while also enabling direct fitment of a lifting hook and the coupler includes an elongated pin (26) (see Figs, 1 and 2) extending about a longitudinal axis of which the second part is pivotal relative to the first part.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacKay Sim (8,172,289) (see IDS) and Manney et al. (3,373,560) and further in view of Lawley (7,562,919).
The modified MacKay Sim (8,172,289), as presented above, shows that the first loop and the second loop appears to be the same size,
but does not specifically show that
the first loop is a different size to the second loop or the first loop is smaller than the second loop.
However, Fig. 2 of Lawley (7,562,919) teaches a plurality of loops (30) having different sizes for lifting.
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
different size on the first and second loop on the MacKay Sim (8,172,289) as taught by
Lawley (7,562,919) to provide flexibility and more room to fit the application to a user.
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