DETAILED ACTION
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 10, 2023, May 16, 2023, April 22, 2024, February 13, 2025, and November 21, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-2,4, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 102019218132 A1.
As to claim 1, DE 102019218132 A1 discloses a robot hand (18.2), as illustrated in Figures 1-13, comprising a gripping part (21,22) (see Figure 7) configured to grip a target object (10); and a mounting part (20, 26.1,26.2) configured to mount the gripping part to a mounted part (17.1,17.2) (see Figure 8) of a robot (robot arm 1), wherein the gripping part is further configured to operate in a first movement region (closed position) to grip the target object (see the bottom drawing of Figure 8), and a second movement region (open position) to be removed from the mounted part (see the top drawing of Figure 8), and wherein the mounting part is engaged with the mounted part in the first movement region, and the mounting part is removed from the mounted part in the second movement region (see Figure 8).
With claim 2, the mounting part (20) comprises a slide part (26.1,26.2) configured to slide in conjunction with an operation of the gripping part, and wherein the mounting part is engaged with the mounted part by engaging the slide part to the mounted part in the first movement region as the slide part slides, and the mounting part is removed from the mounted part by disengaging the slide part from the mounted part in the second movement region.
With claim 4, a link part that is connected to the slide part, wherein the slide part is configured to be operated in conjunction with the operation of the gripping part, and wherein the slide part simultaneously slides by a force transmitted through the link part (see annotated Figure 7 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
632
522
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 19, DE 102019218132 A1 discloses a robot (robot hand 18.2), as illustrated in Figures 1-13, comprising a gripping part (21,22) (see Figure 7) configured to grip a target object (10); a mounted part (17.1,17.2) (of robot arm 1 - see Figure 8); and a mounting part (20, 26.1,26.2) configured to mount the gripping part to the mounted part (17.1,17.2), wherein the gripping part is configured to operate in a first movement region (closed position) to grip the target object (see the bottom drawing of Figure 8), and a second movement region (open position) to be removed from the mounted part (see the top drawing of Figure 8), and wherein the mounting part is engaged with the mounted part in the first movement region, and the mounting part is removed from the mounted part in the second movement region (see Figure 8).
As to claim 20, DE 102019218132 A1 discloses a robot (robot hand 18.2), as illustrated in Figures 1-13, comprising a gripping part (21,22) (see Figure 7) configured to grip a target object (10); a mounted part (17.1,17.2) (of robot arm 1 – see Figure 8) configured to mount the gripping part thereto; a motor (arm joints can have a motor – see page 3 of DE 102019218132 A1-Google Patents English Translation), configured to drive the gripping part; and a controller (motor or the drive can be controlled automatically by means of a control device, in particular an electrical control device, such as a robot controller - see page 3 of DE 102019218132 A1-Google Patents English Translation) configured to control the motor, wherein the gripping part is further configured operate in a first movement region (closed position) and a second movement region (open position), and wherein the controller is further configured to control the gripping part to operate in the first movement region to grip the target object and operate in the second movement region to be removed from the mounted part (see Figure 8).
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102019218132 A1 in view of Varley et al (US 2022/0024051).
DE 102019218132 A1 discloses the claimed invention except a waterproof cover that covers an exterior of the robot hand.
Varley et al teaches it is well known in the art for using a waterproofing cover can be used for a robot hand (see paragraphs [0001,0004, 0032]).
To provide the device of DE 102019218132 A1 with waterproof cover for an exterior of the robot hand would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teachings of Varley et al, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, i.e., one skilled in the art would have recognized that the waterproof cover used in Varley et al protect the robot hand of DE 102019218132 A1 from moisture buildup.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 6-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Iwasaki, Dunlap, Redmon, Jr, Bjornson, Yasuhara, and Kato are cited as being relevant art, because each prior art discloses a robot hand comprising a gripping part and a mounting part.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 am - 3:30 pm 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, 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.
STEPHEN VU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3654
/STEPHEN A VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights