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 .
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 4, 6, 12, 14, & 16 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.
Regarding claim 4, the claim is indefinite because the limitation “by a self-weight of the workpiece” is not clearly linked to the guiding of the workpiece or engagement of the workpiece by first parts. Examiner recommends restructuring claim for clarity. Examiner interprets claim to indicate the first gripper guides the workpiece with the assistance of gravity.
Regarding claim 6, the claim is indefinite because it is unclear whether “the axis” refers to the “predetermined axis” from claim 1 or a new axis. If “the axis” refers to a new axis, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 recites the limitation "a workpiece" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether “a workpiece” refers to a new workpiece or the workpiece described in claim 1 (line 4).
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 recites the limitation "a workpiece" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether “a workpiece” refers to a new workpiece or the workpiece described in claim 1 (line 4).
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 recites the limitation "a first workpiece" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether “a first workpiece” refers to a new workpiece or the workpiece described in claim 1 (line 4).
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nomura (PGPub US 2012/0059517 A1).
Regarding claim 1, the robot hand of Nomura teaches a hand comprising:
a first gripper (60, Fig 13B);
and a second gripper (54, Fig 13B), wherein the second gripper grips a workpiece located on a predetermined axis, the first gripper includes two first fingers that are opened and closed in a predetermined opening/closing direction, and each of the two first fingers includes a first part including a distal end and a second part including a proximal end (Annotated Fig 13B), and is bent or curved such that the first part moves between an interference position at which an imaginary region defined by projecting the first part in the opening/closing direction interferes with the axis (Fig 15B) and a non-interference position at which the imaginary region does not interfere with the axis (Fig 13B).
PNG
media_image1.png
457
885
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Nomura further teaches the first gripper moves the first parts to the interference position while gripping the workpiece with the first parts of the two first fingers (Fig 15B; [0093] ln 3-7), and the second gripper receives the workpiece from the first parts at the interference position (Fig 15B).
Regarding claim 3, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 2 as described above, Nomura further teaches a robot hand wherein in delivering the workpiece to the second gripper at the interference position, the first gripper guides the workpiece to a delivery posture for delivering the workpiece to the second gripper by the first parts with the workpiece released from gripping by the first parts (Fig 15B).
Regarding claim 4, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 3 as described above, as best understood by the examiner Nomura further teaches a robot hand wherein the first gripper guides the workpiece to the delivery posture by engaging a part of the workpiece with upper portions of the first parts by a self-weight of the workpiece (Fig 15B). Figure 15B discloses a position of the hand where the force of gravity would guide the workpiece downwards, while held by the first gripper, towards the second gripper.
Regarding claim 5, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 3 as described above, Nomura further teaches a robot hand wherein the first gripper guides the workpiece to the delivery posture by the first parts (Fig 15B) with the workpiece placed on a support base by releasing gripping of the workpiece by the first parts (Fig 5). The robot hand of Nomura is capable of performing this task given a support base (Annotated Fig 8).
PNG
media_image2.png
175
452
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 2 as described above, Nomura further teaches a robot hand wherein in receiving the workpiece from the first parts, the second gripper grips the workpiece with the axis located at a center of gripping (Fig 15B).
Regarding claim 7, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Nomura further teaches a robot hand wherein the first gripper guides the workpiece by the first parts to a posture for gripping the workpiece by the second gripper with the first parts of the two first fingers moved to the interference position (Fig 15B).
Regarding claim 8, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Nomura further teaches a robot hand wherein the second gripper grips the workpiece ([0097] ln 2-8; Fig 15B), and the first gripper grips the workpiece gripped by the second gripper with the first fingers that are bent or curved (Fig 15B).
Regarding claim 9, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Nomura further teaches a robot hand wherein the first gripper moves the first parts to the interference position, and the second gripper temporarily places the workpiece gripped by the second gripper on the first parts at the interference position, and grips the workpiece placed on the first parts again (Fig 15B; [0097] ln 16-20).
Regarding claim 10, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Nomura further teaches a robot hand wherein the second gripper is movable a direction of the axis (extensible portion 61, [0097] ln 20-24; Fig 15B), the first gripper grips a first workpiece with the first fingers that are bent or curved (Fig 15B; [0093] ln 3-7), the first workpiece (11) being combined with a second workpiece (8; Fig 5), and the second gripper changes relative positions of the first workpiece and the second workpiece by moving in the direction of the axis while gripping the second workpiece (Fig 5). Figure 5 of Nomura discloses an embodiment of the robot hand performing assembly of a first workpiece into a second workpiece. Nomura further teaches this assembly process is able to be completed by the embodiment shown in Figure 13B & Figure 15B ([0097] last 4 lines; Fig 14).
Regarding claim 11, The robot hand of Nomura teaches a hand comprising:
a first gripper (60, Fig 13B); and a second gripper (54, Fig 13B), wherein the first gripper delivers a workpiece gripped by the first gripper to the second gripper (Fig 15B; [0093] ln 3-7), and the second gripper receives the workpiece from the first gripper on a predetermined axis, and grips the workpiece with the axis located at a center of gripping (Fig 15B).
Regarding claim 12, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Nomura further teaches a control method comprising:
gripping a workpiece by the first gripper with the first parts of the two first fingers (Fig 15B);
moving the first parts to the interference position by the first gripper with the workpiece gripped by the first gripper (Fig 15B; [0093] ln 3-7); and receiving the workpiece by the second gripper from the first parts at the interference position (Fig 15B).
Regarding claim 13, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Nomura further teaches a control method comprising:
guiding the workpiece by the first gripper with the first parts to a posture for gripping the workpiece by the second gripper in a state where the first parts of the two first fingers have been moved to the interference position (Fig 15B; [0093] ln 3-7); and gripping, by the second gripper, the workpiece guided by the first gripper (Fig 15B; [0097] ln 16-20).
Regarding claim 14, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Nomura further teaches a control method comprising: gripping a workpiece by the second gripper (Fig 15B);
and gripping, by the first gripper, the workpiece gripped by the second gripper with the first fingers that are bent or curved (Fig 15B).
Regarding claim 15, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Nomura further teaches a control method comprising: moving the first parts to the interference position by the first gripper (Fig 15B; [0093] ln 3-7);
temporarily placing the workpiece by the second gripper on the first parts at the interference position with the workpiece gripped by the second gripper (15B; [0097] ln 16-20);
and gripping the workpiece placed on the first parts by the second gripper again (Fig 15B; [0097] ln 16-20).
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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nomura in view of Shimizu (JP 2006035346 A).
Regarding claim 16, Nomura teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Nomura further teaches a control method comprising: gripping a first workpiece by the first gripper with the first fingers that are bent or curved (Fig 15B), the first workpiece being combined with a second workpiece (Fig 5). However, Nomura does not teach gripping a second workpiece by the second grippers and changing the work pieces’ relative positions while gripping the second workpiece. However, the robot of Shimizu discloses a robot that installs a first workpiece held by a first gripper to a second workpiece held by a second gripper (Abstract). The method of Shimizu performed by the robot hand of Nomura would function by changing relative positions of the first and second workpiece by moving the second gripper in a direction of the axis while gripping the second workpiece ([0097] ln 20-24; Fig 15B). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to utilize the hand of Nomura with the method of Shimizu by using the second gripper to hold the second workpiece and performing the assembly action in the hand to increase the productivity and speed assembly (Pg 2, Tech-Problem, Paragraph 1, ln 3-6).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
PGPub 2017/0021498 A1 discloses a robot hand with grippers capable of transferring workpieces between each other.
US Patent 9,597,803 B2 discloses a robot device with two grippers that perform work on a workpiece.
PGPub 2014/0067115 A1 discloses a robot with a first and second gripper that combine a first and second workpiece.
JP 2013223905 A discloses a robot hand with two grippers capable of 90 degree rotation to manipulate a workpiece.
WO 2018186290 disclose a robot with two grippers transferring a workpiece from one to the other.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RALPH D WILKINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6183. The examiner can normally be reached 8 - 4, M-Fr.
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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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.
/RALPH D WILKINSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/PETER H CHOI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3681
Prosecution Insights