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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 03, lines 13-14, "will be failed' should read "will fail".
In paragraphs 21-24, the semicolon should be replaced with a period.
In paragraph 27, line 17, a space is needed between "struts" and "51."
In paragraph 27, line 20, the following phrase is unclear: "At the moment, the connecting struts 51 and the connecting plate 52 do relative motion…"
In paragraph 28, lines 13-14, "The first connection mode:" should read "In the first connection mode,".
In paragraph 28, line 21, "The second connection mode:" should read "In the second connection mode,".
In paragraph 29, line 1, there should be a space between "FIG. 4" and "illustrates".
In paragraph 31, lines 5-7, the following sentence is unclear: "Due to influences of a mounting error, a part of the adsorption part 1 is liable to be earlier attached to the building material than the other part of the adsorption part 1 does in an alignment process."
Page 9 should be removed as it is blank.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanaka et al (U.S. Patent No. 20190077027).
Regarding claim 1, Tanaka et al teaches an integrated vacuum suction pad characterized by comprising an adsorption part (113) and a vacuum device (52) (Abstract, Paragraph 0061, lines 7-11);
The vacuum device (52) is fixedly arranged on one side of the adsorption part (113), and comprises a vacuum pump (52), a control valve (53) and a relay (50) (Paragraph 0061, lines 7-11; Paragraph 0058, lines 2-6, Paragraph 0099);
The vacuum pump (52) is used for pumping out air between the adsorption part (113) and an object to be adsorbed (Paragraph 0059, lines 1-2, 10-11; Paragraph 0061, lines 7-11),
And the control valve (53) is used for controlling the adsorption part (113) to be communicated with atmosphere or the vacuum pump (52) (Paragraph 0059, lines 3-9);
And the relay (50) is used for powering on the vacuum pump (52) and the control valve (53) (Paragraph 0099, lines 3-9).
Regarding claim 2, Tanaka et al teaches a protective box (111), and the protective box is fixedly arranged on one side of the adsorption part (113) (Paragraph 0035, lines 1-3; Fig. 2a and 2c, elements 111 and 113);
The protective box (11), comprises a mounting frame (112) and a protective cover (111), and the protective cover (111) is connected with the mounting frame (112) (Paragraph 0035, lines 6-12; Fig. 2a and 2c, elements 111 and 112);
And the vacuum device (52) is arranged in the protective box (11) (Paragraph 0035, lines 1-3).
Regarding claim 3, Tanaka et al teaches that set screws are fixedly arranged on the adsorption part (113), the mounting frame (112) is connected to the adsorption part (113) by the set screws, and the protective cover (111) is connected with the mounting frame (112) by the set screws (Fig. 2a-2c). Additional details are provided in the figure below.
Regarding claim 4, Tanaka et al teaches that the mounting frame (111) is fixedly connected with the adsorption part (113), and connecting parts through with the screws can penetrate are arranged on the mounting frame (112) (Fig. 2a-2c);
And the protective cover (111) is connected with the mounting frame (112) by the connecting parts (Fig. 2a and 2c). Additional details are provided in the figure below.
PNG
media_image1.png
700
930
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Tanaka et al teaches that the mounting frame (112) comprises a mounting plate (Paragraph 0036, lines 2-4),
The mounting plate and the adsorption part (113) are arranged at intervals (Paragraph 0035, lines 8-12; Fig. 2a, elements 112 and 113),
And the vacuum pump (52) is arranged on the adsorption part (113) (Paragraph 0061, lines 7-11; Fig. 5, elements 52 and 113).
Regarding claim 8, Tanaka et al teaches a vacuum tank (59) (Paragraph 0094, lines 2-5),
And the vacuum tank (59) is fixedly arranged on one side of the adsorption part (113) (Fig. 10, elements 59 and 113);
The vacuum tank (59) is communicated with the vacuum pump (52) (Paragraph 0094, lines 5-8; Fig. 10, elements 52 and 59),
And the adsorption part (113) can be controlled by the control valve (53) to be communicated with the vacuum tank (59) or the atmosphere (Paragraph 0094, lines 9-18) (Paragraph 0094, lines 9-18).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al in view of Yin et al (CN 109806420).
Tanaka et al fails to teach a drainage plate. Yin et al teaches a mounting frame (1) which further comprises a drainage plate (232) (Fig. 1, element 1; Fig. 6, element 232),
And the drainage plate (232) extends from one end of the mounting frame (1) to the other end, close to the adsorption part, of the mounting frame (1) (Fig. 6, element 232; Fig. 1, elements 1 and 2). Additional details are provided in the figure below.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the teaching of Yin et al to facilitate the creation of an adsorption device that features a drainage plate in order to prevent water damage to the device as taught by Yin et al.
PNG
media_image2.png
580
369
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Tanaka et al fails to teach a gap between the drainage plate and the protective cover. Yin et al teaches that the end of the drainage plate (232) is bent, so that a gap is formed between the drainage plate (232) and the inner wall of the protective cover (46) (Fig. 6, element 232; Paragraph 8; Fig. 12, element 46). Additional details are provided in the figures below.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the teaching of Yin et al to facilitate the creation of a gap to house parts and prevent mechanical interference as taught by Yin et al.
PNG
media_image3.png
580
370
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al in view of Feng et al.
Tanaka et al fails to teach struts and a connecting plate. Feng et al teaches a mounting part (100, 1121) (Fig. 1, element 1121; Fig. 2, element 100),
and the mounting part comprises connecting struts (110, 111) and a connecting plate (115) (Fig. 1 elements 110 and 115; Fig. 2, element 115);
And the connecting struts (110, 111) are connected with the adsorption part (Abstract; Paragraph 0031),
And the connecting struts (110, 111) penetrate through the connecting plate (115) (Paragraph 0046; Fig. 1, elements 110, 111, 115).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the teaching of Feng et al to facilitate the creation of a mounting part that includes struts and a connecting plate as taught by Feng et al.
Tanaka et al fails to teach springs connected to the struts. Feng et al teaches springs (114) (Fig. 1, element 114),
one end of each of the springs (114) is in contact with each of the connecting struts (110, 111), and the other end of each of the springs (114) is in contact with the connecting plate (1121) (Fig. 1, elements 114 and 1121).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the teaching of Feng et al to facilitate the creation of springs that are in contact with the struts and connecting plate as taught by Feng et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYDNEY JEANINE SIMMONS whose telephone number is (571)272-7472. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 7:30am to 5:00pm.
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.
/SYDNEY JEANINE SIMMONS/Examiner, Art Unit 3651
/GENE O CRAWFORD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651