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.
Response to Amendments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/20/2022, with respect to figure numbers 13, 30, 31, 32 and 33 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objection has been overcome.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/20/2022, with respect to the specification have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objection has been overcome.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/20/2022, with respect to claim 16 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objection has been overcome.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/20/2022, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-16 under 102(a) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Wennberg et al (U.S. Patent No. 20060034968).
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.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Payton et al (WO 2020072813).
Regarding claim 12, Payton et al teaches a picking device (300) configured for delivering a jet of pressurized gas through the bottom surface of the front piece (302) (Paragraph 0134, lines 9-12).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wennberg (U.S. Patent No. 20060034968) in view of O'Connor et al (U.S. Patent No. 10357883).
Regarding claim 1, Wennberg teaches a picking device for picking workpieces (3) having a predetermined shape from a worktable surface (2) (Abstract), the picking device comprising:
A collector arm (20) having a first end and a second end (Paragraph 0031, lines 1-5; annotated figure);
A collector head provided at the end of the collector arm (20) (Paragraph 0031, lines 9-12);
The collector arm (20) being configured for moving the collector head relative to the worktable surface (2), and aligning the collector head relative to the workpiece (3) when the workpiece (3) is located on the worktable surface (2) (Paragraph 0023, lines 1-5), wherein the collector head comprises:
A base connecting to the second end of the collector arm (20) and having a distal surface (annotated figure), and
A front piece (5) arranged distalmost on the base of the collector head (Paragraph 0025, lines 1-6; Fig. 1, element 5),
Wherein the front piece (5) comprises a body formed in a resilient material (Paragraph 0024, lines 1-4), the body comprising:
A proximal surface at a proximal end of the body and configured to the distal surface of the base (annotated figure);
A distalmost surface formed at an opposite, distal end of the body and parallel to the proximal surface (annotated figure);
A depression extending in the proximal direction from the distalmost surface, the depression having a bottom surface and one or more sidewalls extending between the bottom surface and the distalmost surface wherein the depression has a contour shaped to match at least a portion of the shape of the workpiece (3) (annotated figure),
Such that when the contour of the depression is aligned with a mating portion of the shape of the workpiece (3) on the worktable surface (2), and when the collector head is pressed over the workpiece (3), at least a mating portion of the workpiece (3) is received in the depression, and such that at least two opposing sidewalls of the one or more sidewalls of the depression squeezes on surfaces of the workpiece (3) to hold the workpiece (3) in place between the sidewalls of the depression, when the collector head is lifted from the worktable surface (2) (Paragraph 0027, lines 1-15; Fig. 2, elements 3, 5). Additional details are provided in the figure below.
Wennberg does not teach a front piece made from a pliable material. O’Connor et al teaches a vacuum end effector wherein the front piece comprises a body (125) made of a pliable material (Column 2, lines 35-40; Fig. 1B, element 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the teachings of O’Connor et al in Wennberg to facilitate the creation of a flexible front piece that can conform to the shape of the object to be lifted as taught by O’Connor et al (Column 2, lines 51-57).
PNG
media_image1.png
355
562
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Wennberg further teaches each of said sidewalls of the front piece (5) has a portion which extends perpendicularly relative to the distalmost surface (annotated figure). Additional details are provided in the figure below.
PNG
media_image2.png
313
562
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Wennberg further teaches a depth of the depression from a rim between the distalmost surface and the sidewall of the depression to a bottom surface of the depression at least corresponds to one-half of a thickness of the workpiece (3) at a location between said two surfaces of the workpiece (3) facing away from each other (Paragraph 0027, lines 1-15; Fig. 2, elements 3, 5).
Regarding claim 4, Wennberg further teaches a bottom of the depression is distal relative to the proximal surface of the front piece (5) (annotated figure). Additional details are provided in the figure below.
PNG
media_image3.png
313
562
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Wennberg further teaches the sidewalls of the depression are mutually facing, where a common longitudinal axis is defined along the mutually facing sidewalls, and where the depression has a first end and a second end in the direction of the longitudinal axis (annotated figure). Additional details are provided in the figure below.
PNG
media_image4.png
313
562
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Wennberg does not teach a front piece made from a pliable material. O’Connor et al teaches a vacuum end effector wherein the front piece comprises a body (125) made of a pliable material (Column 2, lines 35-40; Fig. 1B, element 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the teachings of O’Connor et al in Wennberg to facilitate the creation of a flexible front piece that can conform to the shape of the object to be lifted as taught by O’Connor et al (Column 2, lines 51-57).
Regarding claim 10, Wennberg further teaches the collector head comprises:
A vacuum port (14) formed through base and connectable to a vacuum pump (Paragraph 0025, lines 11-14; Fig. 1, element 14); and
A suction inlet (17) formed through the bottom surface of the depression, the suction inlet (17) communicating with the vacuum port of the base (Fig. 1, element 17).
Regarding claim 11, Wennberg further teaches a vacuum distributing basin is formed in the bottom surface of the depression and into the body of the front piece (5), and wherein the suction inlet (17) is formed in the vacuum distributing basin (Paragraph 0014, lines 1-20; Fig. 2, elements 5, 17).
Regarding claim 13, Wennberg teaches a method of picking workpieces (3) having a predetermined shape from a worktable surface (2), using a picking device comprising:
A collector arm (20) having a first end and a second end (Paragraph 0031, lines 1-5; annotated figure); and
A collector head provided at the second end of the collector arm (20) (Paragraph 0031, lines 9-12);
Wherein the collector arm (20) is configured for moving the collector head relative to the worktable surface (2), and aligning the collector head relative to the workpiece (3) when the workpiece (3) is located on the worktable surface (2) (Paragraph 0023, lines 1-5), wherein the collector head comprises:
A base connecting to the second end of the collector arm (20) and having a distal surface (annotated figure), and
A front piece (5) arranged distalmost on the base of the collector head (Paragraph 0025, lines 1-6; Fig. 1, element 5),
Wherein the front piece (5) comprises a body, formed in a resilient material (Paragraph 0024, lines 1-4), the body comprising:
A proximal surface at a proximal end of the body and configured for connecting to the distal surface (annotated figure); and
A distalmost surface at an opposite, distal end of the body, and parallel to the proximal surface; and (annotated figure)
A depression extending in the proximal direction from the distalmost surface, the depression having a bottom surface and at least two opposing sidewalls extending between the bottom surface and the distalmost surface (Paragraph 0027, lines 1-5; annotated figure),
Wherein the depression has a contour shaped to match at least a portion of the shape of the workpiece (3) (Paragraph 0027, lines 1-5; annotated figure),
Wherein the method comprises: placing the collector head over a workpiece (3) such that the sidewalls of the depression are aligned with the mating portion of the shape of the workpiece (3) (Paragraph 0031, lines 7-9; Fig. 1, element 3);
Pressing the collector head over at least the mating portion of the workpiece (3) such that at least the mating portion of the workpiece (3) is received in the depression and the at least two opposing sidewalls are deformed to squeeze on surfaces of the workpiece (3) (Paragraph 0031, lines 9-18; Fig. 2, element 3);
Lifting the collector head with the workpiece (3) held in place between the sidewalls (Paragraph 0032, lines 8-12; Fig. 3, element 3). Additional details are provided in the figure below.
Wennberg does not teach a front piece made from a pliable material. O’Connor et al teaches a vacuum end effector wherein the front piece comprises a body (125) made of a pliable material (Column 2, lines 35-40; Fig. 1B, element 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the teachings of O’Connor et al in Wennberg to facilitate the creation of a flexible front piece that can conform to the shape of the object to be lifted as taught by O’Connor et al (Column 2, lines 51-57).
PNG
media_image5.png
444
703
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Wennberg further teaches applying a vacuum to the depression to suck the workpiece (3) into contact with the depression (Paragraph 0014, lines 1-20; Fig. 2, element 3).
Regarding claim 16, Wennberg further teaches a method of manufacturing a front piece (5) for a collector head for a picking device for picking workpieces (3) having a predetermined shape from a worktable surface (2), the method comprising:
Determining a shape of at least a portion of the workpieces (3) (Paragraph 0024, lines 6-9),
Determining a shape of a distal surface of a base of the collector head of the picking device (Paragraph 0024, lines 9-11);
Forming, in a resilient material, a body of the front piece (5) (Paragraph 0024, lines 1-4) such that the body comprises:
A proximal surface at a proximal end of the body and configured for connecting to the distal surface of the base (annotated figure);
A distalmost surface formed at an opposite, distal end of the body and parallel to the proximal surface (annotated figure);
A depression extending in the proximal direction from the distalmost surface, the depression having a bottom surface and at least two opposing sidewalls extending between the bottom surface and the distalmost surface (Paragraph 0027, lines 1-5; annotated figure),
Such that the depression is dimensioned to allow a deformation of at least one of the two opposing sidewalls of the depression when a collector head is aligned with and pressed over the workpiece (3), and to the effect that the workpiece (3) may be held by friction between the two opposing sidewalls of the depression when the collector head is lifted (Paragraph 0031, lines 9-18; Fig. 2, elements 1, 3). Additional details are provided in the figure below.
PNG
media_image6.png
444
703
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wennberg in view of O’Connor et al and in further view of Polido et al (US 10611037).
Regarding claim 6, Wennberg in view of O’Connor et al fails to teach a support surface. Polido et al teaches a picking device (10) with a support surface (40) that is provided in extension of the first and/or second end of the depression in the direction of the longitudinal axis, and wherein said support surface (40) extends in a plane parallel to said bottom surface of the depression (Fig. 3A, elements 20, 40). 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 teachings of Polido et al in combination with Wennberg and O’Connor et al to facilitate the creation of a support surface that aid the picking device in targeting and lifting the intended item as taught by Polido et al (Column 2, lines 24-33).
PNG
media_image7.png
611
309
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Wennberg in view of O’Connor et al fails to teach a support surface with a contour. Polido et al teaches a picking device (10) with a support surface (40) that is contoured to correspond to a contour of a second portion of the workpiece (409) to be picked (Fig. 3C-3D, elements 20, 40, 209).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the teachings of Polido et al in combination with Wennberg and O’Connor et al to facilitate the creation of a support surface that can conform to the shape of an item as taught by Polido et al (Column 2, lines 33-36).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wennberg in view of O'Connor et al and in further view of Zanella et al (US 20190366559).
Regarding claim 9, Wennberg in view of O’Connor et al fails to teach an intermediary part. Zanella et al teaches a picking device with a collector head (1) that comprises an intermediary part (4) and wherein a first end of the intermediary part (4) is connected to the distal end of the base (6) and wherein a second end of the intermediary part (4) connects to the proximal end of the front piece (2) (Fig. 2, elements 2, 4, 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the teachings of Zanella et al in combination with Wennberg and O’Connor et al to facilitate the creation of an intermediary part that can reduce deformation of the workpiece as taught by Zanella et al (Paragraph 0060, lines 1-5).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wennberg in view of O'Connor et al and in further view of Payton et al (WO 2020072813).
Regarding claim 15, Wennberg in view of O’Connor et al fails to teach a jet of pressurized gas. Payton et al teaches a picking device (300) with a method of moving said collector arm (306) to move the collector head (302) with the workpiece to a second position, and releasing the workpiece from the depression by a jet of pressurized gas delivered to the depression from a source of pressurized gas through the collector head (302) (Paragraph 0131, lines 25-27; Paragraph 0134, lines 9-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the teachings of Payton et al in combination with Wennberg and O’Connor et al to facilitate the creation of a jet of pressurized gas for releasing workpieces, which keeps the vacuum lines clean as taught by Payton et al (Paragraph 0116, lines 31-32).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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, ROBERT HODGE can be reached at 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 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 3654
/ROBERT W HODGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654
