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 EP21213654.3 dated 12/10/2021 and applicant has filed a certified copy of this application on 01/26/2023.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-21 were previously pending. Claims 1, 3, 8-9, 12-14 and 16-17 are amended. Claim 22 is cancelled. New claim 23 is added.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims and specification have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 04/30/2026.
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 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Putynkowski et al. (EP 3991926 A1) hereinafter Putynkowski.
Regarding claim 23, Fig. 5 of Putynkowski (reproduced and annotated below) teaches a gripping module for gripping and moving objects, the gripping module comprising: a module carrier; two active elements (22) that are displaceable relative to one another, wherein each of the two active elements has a gripping surface for gripping an object; and a drive system that is configured to displace at least one active element of the two active elements relative to the module carrier, wherein the drive system includes (25), an actuator element (23), (spring 26) configured to be biased by activation of the electromagnet such that deactivation of the electromagnet results in a biasing force exerted by the biasing element on the actuator element.
PNG
media_image1.png
750
542
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6D of Putynkowski shows a drive system with an electric motor (29).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to add electric motor 29 to the drive system of the gripping module to make it possible to activate clamping with electric motor as well as electromagnet.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-21 are allowed.
Claim 1 is allowed for disclosing “a displacement of the actuator element, which is caused by an activation or a deactivation of the electromagnet occurring after the two active elements have contacted the object, results in a gripping force exerted by the at least one active element on the object”.
These limitations with other claimed limitations in a whole, make the instant invention neither anticipated nor rendered obvious by the best prior art in record.
The closest prior art to the claimed invention of claim 1 are Rose (US 3370213 A) and Putynkowski.
Rose teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) a gripping module (module shown in Fig. 2) for gripping and moving objects, the gripping module comprising: a module carrier (housing 26); two active elements (gripping jaws 28) that are displaceable relative to one another, wherein each of the two active elements has a gripping surface for gripping an object; and a drive system that is configured to displace at least one of the two active elements relative to the module carrier, wherein the drive system includes an electric motor (grip motor 34), an electromagnet (col. 3, lines 8-40: “a pair of diametrically opposed electromagnetic exciter coils 50”), and an actuator element (actuator element comprises at least 36, 38, 41, 40) displaceable by means of the electromagnet, wherein the electric motor and the actuator element are kinematically coupled to the at least one of the two active elements (see col. 3, lines 8-40).
PNG
media_image2.png
144
916
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However Rose does not teach functional relationship between the electric motor and the electromagnet with the electric motor contacting surfaces of the object and the electromagnet excreting gripping force to the object.
PNG
media_image3.png
1134
921
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Putynkowski teaches a motor driven gripping module (Fig. 6D) and an electromagnet driven gripping module (Fig. 5 shown above). However Putynkowski does not teach functional relationship between the electric motor and the electromagnet with the electric motor contacting surfaces of the object and the electromagnet excreting gripping force to the object.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, with respect to amended claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The art rejection has been withdrawn.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Quan (CN 116277118 A) teaches a gripping module with combined electric motor and electromagnet.
PNG
media_image4.png
793
894
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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
Prosecution Insights