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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on Application DE10 2021 126 366.2 dated 10/12/2021 and applicant has filed a certified copy of this application on 10/14/2022.
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 13-15, 18 and 21 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.
Claim 13 recites: “in association with at least one work module support fastening region of said at least one work module support fastening region, a counterbearing unit is provided” which is indefinite. It is not clear if applicant intended to claim --in association with one work module support fastening region of said at least one work module support fastening region, a counterbearing unit is provided--.
Claims 14-15 and 18 are rejected due to dependency on rejected claim 13.
Claim 18 recites “said at least one workpiece carrier subassembly includes: a first fastening region, a second fastening region”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Because “first fastening region” and “second fastening region” are earlier recited in claims 16 and 17. Therefore claim 18 should be dependent on claim 15.
Claim 21 recites “at least one work module of said at least one work module of said plurality of work modules having a work carrier … and a work carrier drive” and further recites “the work carrier of said single-axis work module … and, said work carrier drive of said single-axis work module” which is very unclear.Examiner suggests amending “at least one of said work modules of said at least one work module of said plurality of work modules” to --
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 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (CN 112108829 A).
Regarding claim 21, Wang teaches (reproduced and annotated Fig. below) a modular workstation comprising: a work module support (base structure 2); a plurality of work modules (left and right side power assemblies 35); said work module support having at least one work module support fastening region (end parts of work modules 35 connected to 2) for fixing one work module of said plurality of work modules to said work module support; each work module (35) of said plurality of work modules having a work module fastening region (end parts of work modules 35 connected to 11) for detachably fixing to one work module support fastening region of said at least one work module support fastening region of said work module support; at least one work module of said plurality of work modules having a work carrier (11) movable in at least one movement mode and a work carrier drive (servo motor A42) for driving said work carrier for movement in said at least one movement mode (about D); wherein: at least one work module of said at least one work module of said plurality of work modules having a work carrier movable in a least one movement mode is a single-axis work module (rotates about D); the work carrier of said single-axis work module is rotatable about one single axis of rotation (D); and, said work carrier drive of said single-axis work module is provided in said single-axis work module and forms a part of said single-axis work module and includes a rotary drive (servo motor A42) for driving said work carrier in rotation about said single axis of rotation (D).
PNG
media_image1.png
727
687
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 22 are allowed.
Claims 2-6, 8-10, 12 and 16-17 are allowed due to dependency on allowed claim 1.
Claims 13-15 and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 21 have been considered but are not found persuasive. See rejection of claim 21 above and comparison between the claimed invention and prior art below.
PNG
media_image2.png
1110
687
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 MAHDI H NEJAD whose telephone number is (571)270-0464. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-4pm EST.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
MAHDI H. NEJAD
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/MAHDI H NEJAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723