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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments, filed 8/27/2026, have been fully considered and reviewed by the examiner. Examiner notes the amendment to claims. Claims 1-3 and 5-12 are pending in the instant application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments dated 8/27/2026, have been fully considered but are unpersuasive as directed to newly added claim requirements that are addressed hereinafter.
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) 7 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 09201554, hereinafter JP 554 taken collectively with WO 2020008694 A1, hereinafter WO 694, EP 1435553, hereinafter EP 553 and DE-102013006866, hereinafter DE 866.
JP 554 discloses a robot for coating a vehicle body, comprising: an arm, wherein the arm includes: a coating head, the coating head being configured to dispense a coating material onto the vehicle body (see 0003, Figure 4 and accompanying text, vehicle body is determined to be intended use and the dispensing robot of JP 554 would be capable of dispensing coating onto a vehicle body); and
and an arm control unit comprising a CPU and a memory part and configured to control operation of the arm (controller 50 for controlling the robot, “storage unit” reads on memory, 0007-0008, see 0008 which details the control circuit, which can read on the broadly drafted CPU),
wherein the coating head is configured to move along a main scanning direction by operation of the arm, the coating head is configured to move at a first speed towards a coating start position by movement of the arm by the control means, and when the coating head reaches a specific position provided in a movement path to the coating start position (see Figure 8 and accompanying text, 0011-0012 related to operating speed of coating gun).
As for the requirement of a first and second speed, where the controller controls the operating of the arm so as to have first speed is different from the second speed as claimed, JP 554 discloses such at 0033, where the controller control the movement speed at various points on the coating process, including moving at a first speed, accelerating to second speed, decelerating to another speed to change directions.
JP 554 discloses the coating head reaches the coating start position, coating of the vehicle body is started while maintaining the second speed (0033).
JP 554 discloses supplying the coating material to coating head; however, fails to disclose the circulating path as claimed. However, WO 694, also in the robot coating with a coating gun and discloses the coating supply include a circulation path, including a paint tank (reservoir) and a coating head, where the coating path including a paint supply path and a path return path (Figure 1 and accompanying text). WO 694 discloses a supply device wherein the supply device includes a circulation path and controller to control the pressure of the coating material flowing to provide a control over the spraying pressure (abstract). Therefore, taking the references collectively, it would have been obvious to include the circulation path as taught by JP 554 to reap the benefits to spray pressure control.
The examiner maintains the position that JP 554 with WO 694 meet the claims. Additionally, for the sake of compact prosecution, the examiner cites here EP 553, which discloses a control of an industrial coating robot using a control unit comprising a computer with memory (0002) and discloses that industrial robot for painting using a gun (0012) and discloses that is it known to operate a nozzle for painting efficiency by controlling the nozzle speed such that a nozzle speed is established and then starting the spray when the coating head reaches a coating start position and maintaining the coating speed for the coating (0016) and thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention that predictable results would follow from establishing a nozzle speed and initiating the coating of the substrate while maintaining the speed for the coating so that the whole painting stroke is completed using a constant speed to assure high quality painting (‘”the paint gun needs to have a velocity vector that is constant through the whole paint stroke. In order to accomplish this, the paint gun needs to be accelerated up to the desired speed in a correct direction before the paint is turned on and then the paint gun” and “paint gun can reach the desired speed at the point where the paint starts to be applied”). Therefore, taking the level of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to use a computer and memory to control the process as suggested by EP 553 as such is a well known mechanism for paint spray control. Additionally, it would have been obvious as predictable to have configured the controller to move the nozzle during a stroke and obtain the desired speed at a coating start position and starting the paint stroke at such a start point and thereafter maintain the speed during the coating as such is taught by EP 553 as a known and suitable method for achieving a high quality painting.
As for the requirement of stopping temporarily the coating head and the first speed and second speed different than first, the examiner cites here DE 866, which discloses the robot is temporarily stopped (“the robot is returned and the robot holding position is returned at least to the coating start position of the next scheduled coating position.”) DE 866 discloses the speed to the coating stop and start position to be reduced from the coating speed (i.e. comprises a first speed) (“speed of the robot successively and eventually becomes zero”). Therefore, taking the references collectively it would have been obvious to have temporarily stopped the coating robot as instantly claimed and using a first speed to the position and second speed to coat (first speed is different than second speed) so as to reap the benefits as outlined by DE 866, that is to deposit the coating in precise amounts and locations.
Claim 12: WO 694 discloses the circulation path includes a supply path for supplying the coating material stored in the reservoir to the coating head and a return flow path for refluxing the coating material not used by the coating head to the reservoir (See Figure 1 and accompanying text); the coating device has a dispensing means for feeding the coating material stored in the reservoir to the supply path (pump 11); wherein the robot further comprises: a retracting means for drawing the coating material from the coating head into the return flow path (pump will operate to draw coating material and thus meets this requirement); a first detection means for detecting the pressure of the coating material fed to the supply path (31 at Figure 1); a second detection means for detecting the pressure of the coating material drawn into the return flow path (32 at Figure 1); and a pressure control means for controlling a dispensing amount of the coating material by the dispensing means based on the detection result by the first detection means and for controlling the drawing amount of the coating material by the retracting means based on a detection result by the second detection means (see control device for controlling the paint supply pump to control the pressure of the supply based on the measured results of first and second pressure detection). EP 553 discloses the control unit configured to control the robot and thus using such would have been obvious as predictable.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 554 taken collectively with WO 694 alone or with EP 553 and further with JP 3644551, hereinafter JP 551.
JP 554 with WO 694 alone or with EP 553 discloses paint robot, but fails to disclose the coating head is held at an initial position when not coating and moving from the initial position to the start position as claimed. However, JP 551 discloses the painting gun is in the standby position and then moved to the initial coating position (see P0 at e.g. Figure 4, standby position is located away from substrate, moved to P1 to start the coating process). Therefore, taking the references collectively, using a standby position would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided the control over the robot in relation to the substrate.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 9 and 10 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior art cited by the examiner, alone or in combination, reasonably discloses or makes obvious the CPU configured to move the coating head at a first speed to a coating start position and during such a movement, moving the coating head at a second speed different than first speed, stopping the head at the coating start position, after the stopping resume movement at the second speed and start coating the vehicle body as instantly claimed (i.e. first speed, second speed, stop, second speed, coating).
Claim 8 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior art cited or reviewed by the examiner, alone or in combination, reasonably discloses the forward and backward paths, each with a coating start position and the coating head is temporarily stopped at the coating start position provided at each of the forward and backward path when taken in view of the totality of the claim requirements.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DAVID P TUROCY whose telephone number is (571)272-2940. The examiner can normally be reached Mon, Tues, Thurs, and Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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.
/DAVID P TUROCY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights