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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 26th, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine Yonekawa, with Curhan, is to provide a secondary gripping mode (see Abstract of Curhan).
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(s) 1-3, 5-7, 9, 11-12, 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Yonekawa discloses a robot hand (see annotated Fig. 3 below) comprising: A gripping arrangement (11, 15; see Fig. 3) for gripping, holding and placing down workpieces (see Fig. 3), in particular sheet metal workpieces (5; see abstract), comprising a connection interface (7; see Fig. 3) for attachment to a manipulator (see annotated Fig. 3 below), a pincer gripper (see annotated Fig. 3 below) having a first pincer arm (11; see Fig. 3) and a second pincer arm (15; see Fig. 3), wherein the pincer arms (11, 15) are movable relative to one another by means of a pincer drive (10; see Fig. 3) and, in their closed position (see annotated Fig. 3 below), define a clamping plane (see annotated Fig. 3 below) extending between the pincer arms (11, 15), and wherein the pincer arms (11, 15) in their closed position (see annotated Fig. 3 below) define a longitudinal pincer axis (see annotated Fig. 3 below) extending parallel to the pincer arms (11, 15) and in the clamping plane (see annotated Fig. 3 below), an adhesion gripper (19; see Fig. 3) having at least one vacuum gripping element (see Fig. 3 for the vacuum gripping element) or having at least one magnetic gripper element (23; see Fig. 10), wherein the adhesion gripper (19) comprises a plane of adhesive action (see annotated Fig. 3 below) for holding a workpiece (see Fig. 5-6 for adhesion gripper holding a workpiece), wherein the adhesion gripper (19) is displaceable along an adjustment axis (see Page 2, Para. 11) in the direction of the longitudinal pincer axis (see annotated Fig. 3 below) relative to the pincer gripper (see annotated Fig. 3 below) between a working zone (see annotated Fig. 3 below) and a stand-by zone (see annotated Fig. 3 below) by means of an adjustment drive (21; see Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
403
851
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Yonekawa fails to disclose wherein the clamping plane and the plane of adhesive action are aligned at a right angle to one another, and that wherein the plane of adhesive action extends at a right angle to the longitudinal pincer axis.
However, Curhan teaches an end of arm tool wherein the clamping plane and the plane of adhesive action are aligned at a right angle to one another (see annotated Fig. 20A below), and that wherein the plane of adhesive action extends at a right angle to the longitudinal pincer axis (see annotated Fig. 20A below).
PNG
media_image2.png
537
404
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the clamping plane and the plane of adhesive action are aligned at a right angle to one another, and that wherein the plane of adhesive action extends at a right angle to the longitudinal pincer axis on the robot hand of Yonekawa as taught by Curhan in order to provide a secondary gripping mode (see Abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1.
However, Curhan further teaches an end of arm tool wherein the longitudinal pincer axis and the adjustment axis are positioned coaxially (see annotated Fig. 20A below). See motivation of claim 1.
PNG
media_image3.png
537
404
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1.
However, Curhan further teaches wherein the longitudinal pincer axis and the adjustment axis are positioned in different orientations (see annotated Fig. 20A below). See motivation of claim 1.
PNG
media_image4.png
537
404
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1, further comprising: the second pincer arm (11; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa) is arranged rigidly in relation to the pincer drive (10; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa) and that wherein the first pincer arm (15; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa) is mounted so as to be movable relative to the second pincer arm (11; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa).
Regarding claim 6, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1, wherein the longitudinal pincer axis (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below) and a central axis (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below) of the connection interface (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below) are positioned coaxially to a manipulator (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below).
PNG
media_image5.png
403
851
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1, wherein a pivot axis (14; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa) of the first pincer arm (15; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa) is formed at a right angle to the longitudinal pincer axis (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below) and parallel to the clamping plane (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below) or in the clamping plane (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below), wherein the first pincer arm (15; see Fig. 3) is formed to be pivotable about the pivot axis (see Page 2, Para. 6).
PNG
media_image6.png
403
851
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1.
However, Curhan further teaches wherein the plane of adhesive action (see annotated Fig. 21A below), when the axially outermost working zone of the adhesion gripper is taken, projects beyond an end face (see annotated Fig. 21A below) of the pincer gripper (100; see Fig. 21A) in the axial direction of the adjustment axis (see annotated Fig. 21A below).
PNG
media_image7.png
423
440
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the plane of adhesive action, when the axially outermost working zone of the adhesion gripper is taken, projects beyond an end face of the pincer gripper in the axial direction of the adjustment axis on the robot hand of Yonekawa as taught by Curhan so that the suction cup can be extended towards a grasp target (see Col. 18, lines 10-15).
Regarding claim 11, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1.
However, Curhan further discloses wherein the pincer drive (206; see Fig. 20A) and the adjustment drive (309; see Fig. 20A) can be activated independently of one another and simultaneously (see Fig. 23A and 23B for the adjustment drive acting independently from the pincer drive and the pincer drive acting with the adjustment drive, respectively).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the pincer drive and the adjustment drive can be activated independently of one another and simultaneously on the robot hand of Yonekawa as taught by Curhan so that the suction gripper can contact the article and then fingers can grasp the article to ensure a firm grip (see Col. 22, lines 40-45).
Regarding claim 12, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1.
However, Curhan further discloses wherein the pincer drive (206; see Fig. 20A) and/or the adjustment drive (309; see Fig. 20A) comprises a pressure-driven cylinder (see Col. 14, lines 60-65 for the pincer drive and see Col. 18, lines 50-65 for the adjustment drive), preferably a pneumatic cylinder. See motivation of claim 11.
Regarding claim 15, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1.
However, Curhan further discloses wherein the pressure-driven cylinder of the adjustment drive comprises an annular cylinder space (see annotated Fig. 18 below), which annular cylinder space is arranged around the pressure-driven cylinder of the pincer drive (see annotated Fig. 17 below), wherein a cylinder axis of the pressure-driven cylinder can be positioned coaxially to the adjustment axis (see annotated Fig. 17-18 below).
PNG
media_image8.png
750
644
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1, wherein A manipulator (see annotated Fig. 3 below) having a gripping arrangement (1; see Fig. 2) for gripping, holding and placing down workpieces (see annotated Fig. 3 below), in particular sheet metal workpieces (see Abstract and annotated Fig. 3 below).
PNG
media_image9.png
402
737
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2), further in view of Honsberg (WO 2018073336 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1.
Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, fails to disclose wherein at least three vacuum gripping elements or at least three magnetic gripper elements are formed, which are arranged annularly around the longitudinal pincer axis.
However, Honsberg teaches a manipulator with rotatable gripper arrangement, wherein at least three vacuum gripping elements (11.1, 11.2, 11.3) or at least three magnetic gripper elements are formed, which are arranged annularly around the longitudinal pincer axis (see Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image10.png
575
517
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein at least three vacuum gripping elements or at least three magnetic gripper elements are formed, which are arranged annularly around the longitudinal pincer axis on the robot arm of Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, as taught by Honsberg in order to grip in a mechanically clamped manner (see Abstract).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2), further in view of Lockhart (US 20230028437 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1.
Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, fails to disclose wherein the first pincer arm and the second pincer arm are linearly movable with respect to one another.
However, Lockhart teaches a gripping device wherein the first pincer arm (13; see Fig. 7a) and the second pincer arm (13; see Fig. 7a) are linearly movable with respect to one another (see Para. 0058 and Fig. 7a-7b).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the first pincer arm and the second pincer arm are linearly movable with respect to one another on the robot arm of Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, as taught by Lockhart so that the object can be held securely (see Para. 0054).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2), further in view of Moeck (EP 1970139 B1).
Regarding claim 10, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 1.
Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, fails to disclose wherein the pincer arms, by means of at least one stop or locking element or controlled by a controller, cannot be transferred to a partially or fully open position when the adhesion gripper is moved into the working zone.
However, Moeck teaches a gripper device wherein the pincer arms (6; see Fig. 4-7), by means of at least one stop or locking element (13; see Fig. 4-7) or controlled by a controller (10; see Fig. 4-7; pneumatically actuated rod), cannot be transferred to a partially or fully open position (see annotated Fig. 4-7 below) when the adhesion gripper is moved into the working zone.
PNG
media_image11.png
703
590
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the pincer arms, by means of at least one stop or locking element or controlled by a controller, cannot be transferred to a partially or fully open position when the adhesion gripper is moved into the working zone on the robot arm of Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, as taught by Moeck so that the workpiece gripped is firmly fixed (see Page 6, Para. 9).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2), further in view of Gussmann (KR 20180058747 A).
Regarding claim 13, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 12.
Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, fails to disclose wherein the pressure-driven cylinders can be acted upon by pressure by means of a joint pressure line, wherein at least one valve is formed in the pressure line, said valve being controllable by means of the controller.
However, Gussmann teaches a transfer device for transferring a workpiece wherein the pressure-driven cylinders (see Page 4, Para. 5) can be acted upon by pressure by means of a joint pressure line (55; see Page 4, Para. 6), wherein at least one valve is formed in the pressure line (59; see Page 4, Para. 7), said valve being controllable by means of the controller (57; see Page 4, Para. 7).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the pressure-driven cylinders can be acted upon by pressure by means of a joint pressure line, wherein at least one valve is formed in the pressure line, said valve being controllable by means of the controller on the robot arm of Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, as taught by Gussmann allowing fluid flow in both flow directions (see Page 4, Para. 8).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2), further in view of Gussmann (KR 20180058747 A), further in view of Mizoguchi (JP 2021030439 A).
Regarding claim 14, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan and Gussmann, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 13.
Yonekawa as modified by Curhan and Gussmann, fails to disclose wherein the valve is configured for simultaneously supplying the pressure-driven cylinders and the at least one vacuum gripping element or the at least one magnetic gripper element.
However, Mizoguchi teaches a robotic multi-gripper wherein the valve is configured for simultaneously supplying the pressure-driven cylinders and the at least one vacuum gripping element or the at least one magnetic gripper element (see Page 15, Para. 1 for valves are configured to supply the cylinders and vacuum suction element).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the valve is configured for simultaneously supplying the pressure-driven cylinders and the at least one vacuum gripping element or the at least one magnetic gripper element on the robot arm of Yonekawa as modified by Curhan and Gussmann, so that the manifold can be operated to distribute the vacuum to one, part, or all of the grippers (see Page 15, Para. 1).
Claim(s) 17-19, 21-23, 25-27 and 30-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2), further in view of Moeck (EP 1970139 B1).
Regarding claim 17, Yonekawa discloses a robot hand (see annotated Fig. 3 below) comprising: A gripping arrangement (11, 15; see Fig. 3) for gripping, holding and placing down workpieces (see Fig. 3), in particular sheet metal workpieces (5; see abstract), comprising a connection interface (7; see Fig. 3) for attachment to a manipulator (see annotated Fig. 3 below), a pincer gripper (see annotated Fig. 3 below) having a first pincer arm (11; see Fig. 3) and a second pincer arm (15; see Fig. 3), wherein the pincer arms (11, 15) are movable relative to one another by means of a pincer drive (10; see Fig. 3) and, in their closed position (see annotated Fig. 3 below), define a clamping plane (see annotated Fig. 3 below) extending between the pincer arms (11, 15), and wherein the pincer arms (11, 15) in their closed position (see annotated Fig. 3 below) define a longitudinal pincer axis (see annotated Fig. 3 below) extending parallel to the pincer arms (11, 15) and in the clamping plane (see annotated Fig. 3 below), an adhesion gripper (19; see Fig. 3) having at least one vacuum gripping element (see Fig. 3 for the vacuum gripping element) or having at least one magnetic gripper element (23; see Fig. 10), wherein the adhesion gripper (19) comprises a plane of adhesive action (see annotated Fig. 3 below) for holding a workpiece (see Fig. 5-6 for adhesion gripper holding a workpiece), wherein the adhesion gripper (19) is displaceable along an adjustment axis (see Page 2, Para. 11) in the direction of the longitudinal pincer axis (see annotated Fig. 3 below) relative to the pincer gripper (see annotated Fig. 3 below) between a working zone (see annotated Fig. 3 below) and a stand-by zone (see annotated Fig. 3 below) by means of an adjustment drive (21; see Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
403
851
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Yonekawa fails to disclose wherein the clamping plane and the plane of adhesive action are aligned at a right angle to one another, and that wherein the plane of adhesive action extends at a right angle to the longitudinal pincer axis; and wherein the pincer arms, by means of at least one stop or locking element or controlled by a controller, cannot be transferred to a partially or fully open position when the adhesion gripper is moved into the working zone.
However, Curhan teaches an end of arm tool wherein the clamping plane and the plane of adhesive action are aligned at a right angle to one another (see annotated Fig. 20A below), and that wherein the plane of adhesive action extends at a right angle to the longitudinal pincer axis (see annotated Fig. 20A below).
PNG
media_image2.png
537
404
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the clamping plane and the plane of adhesive action are aligned at a right angle to one another, and that wherein the plane of adhesive action extends at a right angle to the longitudinal pincer axis on the robot hand of Yonekawa, as taught by Curhan, in order to provide a secondary gripping mode (see Abstract).
Further, Moeck teaches a gripper device wherein the pincer arms (6; see Fig. 4-7), by means of at least one stop or locking element (13; see Fig. 4-7) or controlled by a controller (10; see Fig. 4-7; pneumatically actuated rod), cannot be transferred to a partially or fully open position (see annotated Fig. 4-7 below) when the adhesion gripper is moved into the working zone.
PNG
media_image11.png
703
590
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the pincer arms, by means of at least one stop or locking element or controlled by a controller, cannot be transferred to a partially or fully open position when the adhesion gripper is moved into the working zone on the robot arm of Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan, as taught by Moeck, so that the workpiece gripped is firmly fixed (see Page 6, Para. 9).
Regarding claim 18, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17.
However, Curhan further teaches an end of arm tool wherein the longitudinal pincer axis and the adjustment axis are positioned coaxially (see annotated Fig. 20A below). See motivation of claim 17.
PNG
media_image3.png
537
404
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17.
However, Curhan further teaches wherein the longitudinal pincer axis and the adjustment axis are positioned in different orientations (see annotated Fig. 20A below). See motivation of claim 17.
PNG
media_image4.png
537
404
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 21, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17, further comprising: the second pincer arm (11; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa) is arranged rigidly in relation to the pincer drive (10; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa) and that wherein the first pincer arm (15; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa) is mounted so as to be movable relative to the second pincer arm (11; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa).
Regarding claim 22, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17, wherein the longitudinal pincer axis (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below) and a central axis (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below) of the connection interface (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below) are positioned coaxially to a manipulator (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below).
PNG
media_image5.png
403
851
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 23, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17, wherein a pivot axis (14; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa) of the first pincer arm (15; see Fig. 3 of Yonekawa) is formed at a right angle to the longitudinal pincer axis (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below) and parallel to the clamping plane (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below) or in the clamping plane (see annotated Fig. 3 of Yonekawa below), wherein the first pincer arm (15; see Fig. 3) is formed to be pivotable about the pivot axis (see Page 2, Para. 6).
PNG
media_image6.png
403
851
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 25, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17.
However, Curhan further teaches wherein the plane of adhesive action (see annotated Fig. 21A below), when the axially outermost working zone of the adhesion gripper is taken, projects beyond an end face (see annotated Fig. 21A below) of the pincer gripper (100; see Fig. 21A) in the axial direction of the adjustment axis (see annotated Fig. 21A below).
PNG
media_image7.png
423
440
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the plane of adhesive action, when the axially outermost working zone of the adhesion gripper is taken, projects beyond an end face of the pincer gripper in the axial direction of the adjustment axis on the robot hand of Yonekawa as taught by Curhan so that the suction cup can be extended towards a grasp target (see Col. 18, lines 10-15).
Regarding claim 26, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17.
However, Curhan further discloses wherein the pincer drive (206; see Fig. 20A) and the adjustment drive (309; see Fig. 20A) can be activated independently of one another and simultaneously (see Fig. 23A and 23B for the adjustment drive acting independently from the pincer drive and the pincer drive acting with the adjustment drive, respectively).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the pincer drive and the adjustment drive can be activated independently of one another and simultaneously on the robot hand of Yonekawa as taught by Curhan so that the suction gripper can contact the article and then fingers can grasp the article to ensure a firm grip (see Col. 22, lines 40-45).
Regarding claim 27, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17.
However, Curhan further discloses wherein the pincer drive (206; see Fig. 20A) and/or the adjustment drive (309; see Fig. 20A) comprises a pressure-driven cylinder (see Col. 14, lines 60-65 for the pincer drive and see Col. 18, lines 50-65 for the adjustment drive), preferably a pneumatic cylinder. See motivation of claim 26.
Regarding claim 30, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 27.
However, Curhan further discloses wherein the pressure-driven cylinder of the adjustment drive comprises an annular cylinder space (see annotated Fig. 18 below), which annular cylinder space is arranged around the pressure-driven cylinder of the pincer drive (see annotated Fig. 17 below), wherein a cylinder axis of the pressure-driven cylinder can be positioned coaxially to the adjustment axis (see annotated Fig. 17-18 below).
PNG
media_image8.png
750
644
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 31, Yonekawa as modified by Curhan, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17, wherein A manipulator (see annotated Fig. 3 below) having a gripping arrangement (1; see Fig. 2) for gripping, holding and placing down workpieces (see annotated Fig. 3 below), in particular sheet metal workpieces (see Abstract and annotated Fig. 3 below).
PNG
media_image9.png
402
737
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2) and Moeck (EP 1970139 B1), further in view of Honsberg (WO 2018073336 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17.
Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, fails to disclose wherein at least three vacuum gripping elements or at least three magnetic gripper elements are formed, which are arranged annularly around the longitudinal pincer axis.
However, Honsberg teaches a manipulator with rotatable gripper arrangement, wherein at least three vacuum gripping elements (11.1, 11.2, 11.3) or at least three magnetic gripper elements are formed, which are arranged annularly around the longitudinal pincer axis (see Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image10.png
575
517
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein at least three vacuum gripping elements or at least three magnetic gripper elements are formed, which are arranged annularly around the longitudinal pincer axis on the robot arm of Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, as taught by Honsberg in order to grip in a mechanically clamped manner (see Abstract).
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2) and Moeck (EP 1970139 B1), further in view of Lockhart (US 20230028437 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 17.
Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, fails to disclose wherein the first pincer arm and the second pincer arm are linearly movable with respect to one another.
However, Lockhart teaches a gripping device wherein the first pincer arm (13; see Fig. 7a) and the second pincer arm (13; see Fig. 7a) are linearly movable with respect to one another (see Para. 0058 and Fig. 7a-7b).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the first pincer arm and the second pincer arm are linearly movable with respect to one another on the robot arm of Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, as taught by Lockhart so that the object can be held securely (see Para. 0054).
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2) and Moeck (EP 1970139 B1), further in view of Gussmann (KR 20180058747 A).
Regarding claim 28, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 27.
Yonekawa as modified by Curhan and Moeck, fails to disclose wherein the pressure-driven cylinders can be acted upon by pressure by means of a joint pressure line, wherein at least one valve is formed in the pressure line, said valve being controllable by means of the controller.
However, Gussmann teaches a transfer device for transferring a workpiece wherein the pressure-driven cylinders (see Page 4, Para. 5) can be acted upon by pressure by means of a joint pressure line (55; see Page 4, Para. 6), wherein at least one valve is formed in the pressure line (59; see Page 4, Para. 7), said valve being controllable by means of the controller (57; see Page 4, Para. 7).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the pressure-driven cylinders can be acted upon by pressure by means of a joint pressure line, wherein at least one valve is formed in the pressure line, said valve being controllable by means of the controller on the robot arm of Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan and Moeck, as taught by Gussmann allowing fluid flow in both flow directions (see Page 4, Para. 8).
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Yonekawa (JP H06254627 A) in view of Curhan (US 10661447 B2), Gussmann (KR 20180058747 A) and Moeck (EP 1970139 B1), further in view of Mizoguchi (JP 2021030439 A).
Regarding claim 29, Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan, Moeck and Gussmann, discloses the gripping arrangement as claimed in claim 28.
Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan, Moeck and Gussmann, fails to disclose wherein the valve is configured for simultaneously supplying the pressure-driven cylinders and the at least one vacuum gripping element or the at least one magnetic gripper element.
However, Mizoguchi teaches a robotic multi-gripper wherein the valve is configured for simultaneously supplying the pressure-driven cylinders and the at least one vacuum gripping element or the at least one magnetic gripper element (see Page 15, Para. 1 for valves are configured to supply the cylinders and vacuum suction element).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to introduce wherein the valve is configured for simultaneously supplying the pressure-driven cylinders and the at least one vacuum gripping element or the at least one magnetic gripper element on the robot arm of Yonekawa, as modified by Curhan, Moeck and Gussmann, as taught by Mizoguchi, so that the manifold can be operated to distribute the vacuum to one, part, or all of the grippers (see Page 15, Para. 1).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 REHMAN A QURESHI whose telephone number is (571)272-6262. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00am-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.
/REHMAN A QURESHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/GENE O CRAWFORD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights