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 .
Status of claims
The following claims have been rejected or allowed for the following reasons:
Claim(s) 1-20 is rejected under 35 USC § 103
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement/statements (IDS) were filed on 03/3/23 and 7/14/23. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is being considered by the examiner.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 - 3, 5 – 9, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Doosan (NPL) ([Field Application] M1013 - Electric Car Charging Robot), in further view of Mauderli (US 20260027724 A1).
Regarding claim 1 Doosan teaches A charging system for an electric vehicle, the system comprising: a robotic arm; (Doosan figure 1, taken at [0:07], below clearly shows a robotic arm that is configured to charge electric vehicles.);
PNG
media_image1.png
376
856
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 [0:07]
a base secured to the robotic arm; (Doosan figure 2, taken at [1:45], below clearly shows a mechanical base secured to the robotic arm);
PNG
media_image2.png
388
458
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2 [1:45]
a vision sensor disposed on the base (Doosan figure 3, taken at [1:08], below shows the vision sensor attached to the base);
PNG
media_image3.png
244
300
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 3 [1:08]
a gripper extending below the base, the gripper including two opposing fingers configured to be retracted toward each other; (Doosan figure 4, taken at [1:45], shows the use of a pair of mechanical grippers that can move towards each other);
PNG
media_image2.png
388
458
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 4 [1:45]
and an electric charger configured to be secured between the two opposing fingers, (Doosan, Figure 5, taken at [0:42], shows a custom electrical charger configured to be secured by the mechanical grippers);
PNG
media_image4.png
488
464
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Figure 5 [0:42]
wherein the robotic arm is configured to move the electric charger to a charging port of the electric vehicle (Doosan figure 6, taken at [1:09], shows the insertion of the electric vehicle charge into the electric vehicle);
PNG
media_image5.png
418
663
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Figure 6 [1:09]
Doosan does not teach a hook extending from the base, the hook including a proximal end extending from the base and a distal end, the hook having an arcuate profile from the proximal end toward the distal end; opened by the hook based on data from the vision sensor, wherein the distal end of the hook includes an outer convex portion configured to engage a cover of the charging port to open the cover.
Mauderli in analogous art, teaches a hook extending from the base, the hook including a proximal end extending from the base and a distal end, the hook having an arcuate profile from the proximal end toward the distal end; (Mauderli Figure 3 depicts a hook protruding from the base of the robotic manipulator. This hook includes a proximal end 114 and a distal end 115);
PNG
media_image6.png
348
379
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Mauderli Figure 3
opened by the hook based on data from the vision sensor, (Mauderli [0067] readds “A further aspect of the invention concerns an automated vehicle charging system 1 , as now discussed in reference to FIGS. 1 and 7 . The system 1 includes a functionalized robotic arm 10 , 40 as described above, as well as a computerized system 2 . The computerized system 2 is operatively connected to the functionalized robotic arm 10 , 40 . It is configured to instruct the robotic arm 40 to actuate (i.e., rotate and possibly translate) the end effector 10 , so as to open a charge port door 210 of a vehicle via the actuator 114 , 115 of the end effector 10 and connect (i.e., plug) the plug 106 of the electrical connector 106 , 108 of the end effector 10 into a charge port 220 of the vehicle, as discussed earlier.”);
wherein the distal end of the hook includes an outer convex portion configured to engage a cover of the charging port to open the cover. (Mauderli figure 3 depicts the hook having a convex portion. Similarly [0006] reads “That is, the end effector combines an electrical connector and a passive actuator, which is judiciously arranged with respect to the body of the electrical connector. Thanks to the proposed design, the end effector can be rotated by the robotic arm, so that the actuator can be set in position to safely actuate a charge port door of an electric vehicle, by pressing the door at a certain location.“);
PNG
media_image6.png
348
379
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Mauderli Figure 3
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Doosan with that Mauderli to include a hook attached to the end of the robotic manipulator. Doing so would constitute the combination of known methods to yield predictable results since both robotic arms for the attachment of electric chargers and hooks disposed at the end of robotic manipulators would be known to one with ordinary skill in the art. Similarly, their combination would yield the desired and predictable result of a robotic manipulator that could better manipulate the hardware around an electric vehicle charger.
Regarding claim 2 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The charging system of Claim 1, wherein the gripper further comprises an actuator configured to retract the two opposing fingers toward each other. (Doosan Figure 7, taken at [0:42], shows the usage of a two-part grippers in which an actuator moves the fingers towards each other);
PNG
media_image7.png
138
246
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Figure 7 [0:42]
Regarding claim 3 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The charging system of Claim 1, wherein the electric charger includes a release configured to disengage the electric charger from the charging port, and the system further comprises an actuator configured to actuate the release. (Doosan figure 8, taken at [1:47] shows a linear actuator that is actuated such that it allows for the electric vehicle charger to be removed from the chagrining port);
PNG
media_image8.png
389
281
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Figure 8 [1:47]
Regarding claim 5 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The charging system of Claim 1, wherein the hook is deformable (Mauderli [0041] reads “That is, the protruding part 114 extends from the body 108 to the pressure member 115 . The latter is designed to come into safe contact with the charge port door 210 . Note, the pressure member is preferably coated by a soft material, such as foam, to avoid scratching or otherwise damaging the charge port door.”);
and defines a void between a proximal end and a distal end. (Mauderli figure 3 depicts a hook in which there is a void between the proximal and distal end.);
Regarding claim 6 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The charging system of Claim 5, wherein the distal end of the hook is configured to deform toward the proximal end into the void. (Mauderli [0041] reads “That is, the protruding part 114 extends from the body 108 to the pressure member 115 . The latter is designed to come into safe contact with the charge port door 210 . Note, the pressure member is preferably coated by a soft material, such as foam, to avoid scratching or otherwise damaging the charge port door.” It would be appreciated by one with ordinary skill in the art that if the device would be made of a soft material and that the device was used in that manner that it would behave by deforming in that way.);
Regarding claim 7 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The charging system of Claim 1, wherein the gripper includes a protrusion and the electric charger includes a slot configured to receive the protrusion, the protrusion configured to locate the gripper relative to the electric charger when the protrusion is received by the slot. (Doosan Figure 9, taken at [0:43] shows a specialty made grippers that has protrusions that would fit into slots on the electric charger that are configured to receive the protrusions);
PNG
media_image9.png
207
303
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Figure 9 [0:43]
Regarding claim 8 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The charging system of Claim 1, further comprising a fastener securing the base to the robotic arm. (Doosan Figure 10, taken at [0:40], shows the mechanical fasteners that attaches the base to the robotic arm.);
PNG
media_image10.png
213
268
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Figure 10 [0:40]
Regarding claim 9 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The charging system of Claim 1, wherein the hook is configured to open a charging port door of the electric vehicle. (Mauderli [0006] reads “As defined above, the actuator is assumed to be a rigid and static element, which is solely actuated by the robotic arm, without requiring any active component to open the charge port door. That is, the end effector combines an electrical connector and a passive actuator, which is judiciously arranged with respect to the body of the electrical connector. Thanks to the proposed design, the end effector can be rotated by the robotic arm, so that the actuator can be set in position to safely actuate a charge port door of an electric vehicle, by pressing the door at a certain location. Accordingly, there is no need to provide a separate tool (another end effector or robotic arm) to open the vehicle charge port door. Thus, the proposed solution makes it possible to reduce the time duration of the overall plugging process, as well as the costs, given that a single tool is needed to both open the charge port door and plug the connector.”);
Regarding claim 16 Doosan teaches A tool for a robotic arm configured to move an electric charger to an electric vehicle, the tool comprising: a base configured to be secured to the robotic arm; (Doosan figure 15, taken at [1:45], below clearly shows a mechanical base secured to the robotic arm);
PNG
media_image2.png
388
458
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 15 [1:45]
a vision sensor disposed on the base; (Doosan figure 16, taken at [1:08], below shows the vision sensor attached to the base);
PNG
media_image3.png
244
300
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 16 [1:08]
and a gripper extending below the base, the gripper including a track, two opposing fingers configured to move along the track, and an actuator configured to retract the two opposing fingers along the track. (Doosan figure 17, taken at [1:45], shows the use of a pair of mechanical grippers that can move towards each other);
Doosan does not teach a hook including a proximal end fixed to the base, a distal end having an arcuate shape, and a void defined between the proximal end and the distal end; wherein the distal end of the hook is configured to deform toward the proximal end and into the void.
Mauderli in analogous art, teaches a hook including a proximal end fixed to the base, a distal end having an arcuate shape, and a void defined between the proximal end and the distal end; (Mauderli Figure 3 depicts a hook protruding from the base of the robotic manipulator. This hook includes a proximal end 114 and a distal end 115);
PNG
media_image6.png
348
379
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Mauderli Figure 3
wherein the distal end of the hook is configured to deform toward the proximal end and into the void. (Mauderli [0041] reads “That is, the protruding part 114 extends from the body 108 to the pressure member 115 . The latter is designed to come into safe contact with the charge port door 210 . Note, the pressure member is preferably coated by a soft material, such as foam, to avoid scratching or otherwise damaging the charge port door.” It would be appreciated by one with ordinary skill in the art that if the device would be made of a soft material and that the device was used in that manner that it would behave by deforming in that way.);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Doosan with that Mauderli to include a hook attached to the end of the robotic manipulator. Doing so would constitute the combination of known methods to yield predictable results since both robotic arms for the attachment of electric chargers and hooks disposed at the end of robotic manipulators would be known to one with ordinary skill in the art. Similarly, their combination would yield the desired and predictable result of a robotic manipulator that could better manipulate the hardware around an electric vehicle charger.
Regarding claim 17 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The tool of Claim 16 wherein the distal end of the hook is configured to deform toward the proximal end of the hook into the void. (Mauderli [0041] reads “That is, the protruding part 114 extends from the body 108 to the pressure member 115 . The latter is designed to come into safe contact with the charge port door 210 . Note, the pressure member is preferably coated by a soft material, such as foam, to avoid scratching or otherwise damaging the charge port door.” It would be appreciated by one with ordinary skill in the art that if the device would be made of a soft material and that the device was used in that manner that it would behave by deforming in that way.);
Regarding claim 18 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The tool of Claim 16, wherein the gripper further comprises a protrusion configured to be received by a slot of the electric charger. (Doosan Figure 18, taken at [0:43] shows a specialty made grippers that has protrusions that would fit into slots on the electric charger that are configured to receive the protrusions);
PNG
media_image9.png
207
303
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Figure 18 [0:43]
Regarding claim 19 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The tool of Claim 16, further comprising a solenoid actuator including a rod, the solenoid actuator configured to push the rod onto a release of the electric charger. (Doosan figure 19, taken at [1:47] shows a linear actuator that is actuated such that it allows for the electric vehicle charger to be removed from the chagrining port);
PNG
media_image8.png
389
281
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Figure 19 [1:47]
Claim(s) 10, 11 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Doosan (NPL) ([Field Application] M1013 - Electric Car Charging Robot), in further view of Mauderli (US 20260027724 A1), in further view of Alonso (DE 102014017855 A1).
Regarding claim 10 Doosan teaches A method for charging an electric vehicle, the method comprising: actuating a gripper of a tool attached to a robotic arm to secure an electric charger; (Fig 11 taken at [0:49] shows the usage of the robotic arm to pick up, move and manipulate an electric vehicle charger);
PNG
media_image11.png
368
507
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Figure 11 [0:49]
and moving the electric charger with the robotic arm into the charging port. (Doosan Figure 12 taken at [1:09] shows the robotic arm moving the electric vehicle charger into the vehicle charging Doosan/Mauderli port);
PNG
media_image12.png
670
1154
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Figure 12 [1:09]
Doosan does not pressing a distal end of a hook of the tool against [a] an outer surface of a charging port cover to open the charging port cover; inserting a hook of the tool between a charging port door and a charging port of the electric vehicle;
Mauderli in analogous art, teaches pressing a distal end of a hook of the tool against [a] an outer surface of a charging port cover to open the charging port cover; (Mauderli [0041] reads “That is, the protruding part 114 extends from the body 108 to the pressure member 115 . The latter is designed to come into safe contact with the charge port door 210 . Note, the pressure member is preferably coated by a soft material, such as foam, to avoid scratching or otherwise damaging the charge port door.” And [0006] reads “That is, the end effector combines an electrical connector and a passive actuator, which is judiciously arranged with respect to the body of the electrical connector. Thanks to the proposed design, the end effector can be rotated by the robotic arm, so that the actuator can be set in position to safely actuate a charge port door of an electric vehicle, by pressing the door at a certain location.“);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Doosan with that Mauderli to include a hook attached to the end of the robotic manipulator. Doing so would constitute the combination of known methods to yield predictable results since both robotic arms for the attachment of electric chargers and hooks disposed at the end of robotic manipulators would be known to one with ordinary skill in the art. Similarly, their combination would yield the desired and predictable result of a robotic manipulator that could better manipulate the hardware around an electric vehicle charger.
Doosan/Mauderli does not teach inserting a hook of the tool between a charging port door and a charging port of the electric vehicle;
Alonso in analogous art, teaches inserting a hook of the tool between a charging port door and a charging port of the electric vehicle; (Alonso page 3 paragraph 3 reads “These handling robots usually engage with a pin into engagement with the door or bonnet to be opened and then open or close the door (door or hood). In the case of a door of a motor vehicle body, the engagement for the pin of the handling robot is usually formed by the window gap in which the side window is displaceable in the fully assembled state”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Doosan/Mauderli with that of Alonso to provide an improved method of opening a door. (Alonso page 2 paragraph 5 reads “The problem with such handling robots is the exact positioning of the pin of the handling robot in the engagement. Namely, the known geometry data of the vehicle body to be painted, in conjunction with the position of the vehicle body on the conveyor, only allow coarse positioning of the stylus of the manipulator robot relative to engagement with the door to be opened (door or hood).”);
Regarding claim 11 Doosan/Mauderli/Alonso teaches The method of Claim 10, further comprising collecting image data with a vision sensor (Alonso page 4 paragraph 2 reads “The ne positioning of the gripper relative to the engagement on the ap to be opened, on the other hand, taking into account the sensor data.”);
and moving the robotic arm to press the distal end of the tool against the charging port cover based on the image data. (Alonso page 4 paragraph 2 reads “The ne positioning of the gripper relative to the engagement on the ap to be opened, on the other hand, taking into account the sensor data.” And page 4 paragraph 21 reads “If this is the case, then in a step S3, a sensor-controlled approach of the gripper follows 6 to the door 1 where the distance from the sensor 8th measured signals are considered in a position control.”);
Regarding claim 13 Doosan/Mauderli/Alonso teaches The method of Claim 10, further comprising actuating an actuator disposed on the tool to press a release on the electric charger to release the electric charger from the charging port. (Doosan Fig 13 taken at [1:47] shows the usage of the linear actuator to activate the release on the electric charger before the electric charger is removed from the electric vehicle);
PNG
media_image8.png
389
281
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Figure 13 [1:47]
Regarding claim 14 Doosan/Mauderli/Alonso teaches The method of Claim 10, further comprising actuating a pneumatic actuator to move opposing fingers of the gripper toward each other to secure the electric charger. (Doosan figure 14 taken at [0:44] shows the pneumatic fingers of the Doosan robot closing around the electric vehicle charger.);
PNG
media_image13.png
639
917
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Figure 14 [0:44]
Regarding claim 15 Doosan/Mauderli/Alonso teaches The method of Claim 10, further comprising closing the charging port cover with the hook. (Alonso page 4 paragraph 26 reads “In a step S8, the door 1 then closed again.” And page 2 paragraph 3 reads “These handling robots usually engage with a pin into engagement with the door or bonnet to be opened and then open or close the door (door or hood). In the case of a door of a motor vehicle body, the engagement for the pin of the handling robot is usually formed by the window gap in which the side window is displaceable in the fully assembled state.”);
Regarding claim 20 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The tool of Claim 16.
Doosan/Mauderli does not teach wherein the hook comprises a resilient polymer material.
Doosan/Mauderli in analogous art, teaches wherein the hook comprises a resilient polymer material. (Alonso page 4 paragraph 4 reads “For example, the gripper may be made of plastic. This is advantageous because the contact between the gripper and the door to be opened then does not lead to scratch marks on the door to be opened.”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Doosan with that of Alonso to provide an improved method of opening a door. (Alonso page 2 paragraph 5 reads “The problem with such handling robots is the exact positioning of the pin of the handling robot in the engagement. Namely, the known geometry data of the vehicle body to be painted, in conjunction with the position of the vehicle body on the conveyor, only allow coarse positioning of the stylus of the manipulator robot relative to engagement with the door to be opened (door or hood).”);
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Doosan/Mauderli, in further view of Zhi-Ping (CN 209191708).
Regarding claim 4 Doosan/Mauderli teaches The charging system of Claim 1.
Doosan/Mauderli does not teach wherein the vision sensor is configured with an object detection algorithm trained to identify the charging port of the electric vehicle based on images collected by the vision sensor.
Zhi-Ping in analogous art, teaches wherein the vision sensor is configured with an object detection algorithm trained to identify the charging port of the electric vehicle based on images collected by the vision sensor. (Zhi-Ping [0027] reads “When the charging connector when the vision sensor 48 detects the charging port 42 of the electric vehicle, a vision sensor 48 feeds back the signal to the control cabinet, the control cabinet controls”).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Doosan/Mauderli with that of Zhi-Ping to provide a system that improves the charging of electric vehicles. (Zhi-Ping [Background] reads “generally uses the charging pile to charge the electric automobile in daily life, the electric automobile needs to charge, the driver only needs to be opened near the charging pile of electric automobile, car body face the charging head is provided with a charging joint close to the charging pile. However, since charging connector of electric vehicle may be on the sides, front or back of the electric automobile, electric automobile when parking charging, in order to make the charging head is set in vehicle body with a charging joint close to the charging pile of electric automobile parking of the transverse or longitudinal parking, parking space of the charging station of electric automobile irregular resulting in reduced, which reduces the economic benefit of charging station, electric vehicle charging station and it is not convenient.”);
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Doosan/Mauderli/Alonso, in further view of Zhi-Ping (CN 209191708).
Regarding claim 12 Doosan/Mauderli/Alonso teaches The method of Claim 11 and moving the robotic arm to insert the hook based on the identified charging port door. (Alonso page 4 paragraph 2 reads “The ne positioning of the gripper relative to the engagement on the ap to be opened, on the other hand, taking into account the sensor data.” And page 4 paragraph 21 reads “If this is the case, then in a step S3, a sensor-controlled approach of the gripper follows 6 to the door 1 where the distance from the sensor 8th measured signals are considered in a position control.”);
Doosan/Mauderli/Alonso does not teach further comprising identifying the charging port door based on the image data.
Zhi-Ping in analogous art, teaches further comprising identifying the charging port door based on the image data (Zhi-Ping [0027] reads “When the charging connector when the vision sensor 48 detects the charging port 42 of the electric vehicle, a vision sensor 48 feeds back the signal to the control cabinet, the control cabinet controls”).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Doosan/Mauderli/Alonso with that of Zhi-Ping to provide a system that improves the charging of electric vehicles. (Zhi-Ping [Background] reads “generally uses the charging pile to charge the electric automobile in daily life, the electric automobile needs to charge, the driver only needs to be opened near the charging pile of electric automobile, car body face the charging head is provided with a charging joint close to the charging pile. However, since charging connector of electric vehicle may be on the sides, front or back of the electric automobile, electric automobile when parking charging, in order to make the charging head is set in vehicle body with a charging joint close to the charging pile of electric automobile parking of the transverse or longitudinal parking, parking space of the charging station of electric automobile irregular resulting in reduced, which reduces the economic benefit of charging station, electric vehicle charging station and it is not convenient.”);
Response to arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 10, have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection provided above, which was necessitated based on Applicant's amendments to the claims, which thereby changed the scope of the claims. Examiner notes wherein Applicant's arguments appear to be directed towards the newly amended claim limitations, and as such are now addressed in view of the prior art in the above rejection.
Applicant argues < First, we submit that AisRobots is non-analogous art. Non-analogous art refers to prior art that is considered irrelevant or not pertinent to the claimed invention for determining obviousness. MPEP 2141.01(A). Applicant submits that AisRobots is non-analogous art because it is 1) not in the same field of endeavor and 2) not reasonably pertinent to the problem.> [Remarks page 8 Second Paragraph]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. In light of the currently amened limitations AisRobots has been removed from the current rejection of record. The current rejection relies upon Doosan, Mauderli and Alonso to teach the currently amended limitations. Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Applicant argues < The Office Action acknowledges that Doosan, Alonso, and AisRobots fail to disclose a distal end of hook deforming into a void, but alleges that Kawamura discloses this feature. Applicant disagrees. First, we submit that Kawamura is non-analogous art. As noted above, non-analogous art refers to prior art that is considered irrelevant or not pertinent to the claimed invention for determining obviousness. MPEP 2141.01(A).> [Remarks Page 10 fifth paragraph]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. In light of the currently amened limitations Kawamura has been removed from the current rejection of record. The current rejection relies upon Doosan, Mauderli and Alonso to teach the currently amended limitations. Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Other references not Cited
Throughout examination other references were found that could read onto the prior art. Though these references were not used in this examination they could be used in future examination and could read on the contents of the current disclosure. These references are, Dicke (US 20250050771 A1). Dicke in analogous art, could have been used to teach limitations regarding a robotic end effector that could plug into the charging port of an electric vehicle. However, Dicke did not have the depth or specificity of other prior art sources found during examination. Similarly, Dicke did not discuss a hook for opening and manipulating the charging door of an electric vehicle. In light of these limitations it was not used in the current rejection of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN MARTIN O'MALLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-6228. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 am - 5 pm.
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, Ramon Mercado can be reached at (571) 270 - 5744. 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.
/JOHN MARTIN O'MALLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
/Ramon A. Mercado/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights