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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in at least Figures 7-11, 14-16 and 19-21 there are lead lines with no corresponding reference number and/or reference numbers that have been improperly cropped in half. All lead lines need a full, clear reference number, or they should be removed from the Figures. Similarly, in [0059], Figure is referred to and defined as showing an end pickup device 20; however, there is no “20” in Fig. 1.
At least Figs. 7-10, 13, and 16 appear to show cross sectional views, yet none of the Figures show the proper cross hatching. Hatching must be used to indicate section portions of an object, and must be made by regularly spaced oblique parallel lines spaced sufficiently apart to enable the lines to be distinguished without difficulty, 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3).
In Fig. 8, “3” does not appear to be pointing to a driving mechanism, as “3” is defined in the Specification. Similarly, in Figs. 10 and 14, “7” does not appear to be pointing to a limiting device, as “7” is defined in the Specification.
In Fig. 19, there are two “23” which appear to be pointing to different components, which is improper. Also in Fig. 19, “24” and “26” appear to be pointing to the same thing, which is improper.
Finally, in the claims the at least two pickup apparatuses are defined as being relatively telescopic. The Figures and the invention would be clearer if the at least two pickup apparatuses were shown in varying relatively telescopic positions, which currently is not shown.
The Figures should be reviewed in their entirety for other errors.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the pickup apparatus” in line 5. This recitation is unclear as “at least two pickup apparatuses” were previously defined in the claim, thereby making the claim indefinite because it is unclear which pickup apparatus is being referred to in line 5. Consequently, claims 2-18 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite since they depend from rejected claim 1.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the sleeve of the second pickup apparatus" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Consequently, claims 8-12 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite since they depend from rejected claim 7.
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, 14 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Polido et al. (US 2020/0189122 A1) (“Polido”).
Referring to claim 1: Polido teaches an end pickup device, comprising:
a mounting seat 34, 36;
a pickup mechanism 14, 16, disposed on the mounting seat (Fig. 3) and comprising at least two pickup apparatuses 10,14 and 12,16, wherein the at least two pickup apparatuses are movable relative to each other (Figs. 1-4), and the pickup apparatus comprises a pickup part 32 for picking up articles; and
a driving mechanism 50, disposed on the mounting seat and in driving connection with the pickup mechanism, wherein the driving mechanism drives the at least two pickup apparatuses to move relatively, so that the at least two pickup apparatuses pick up the articles in a switching way [0015].
Referring to claim 2: Polido teaches the pickup apparatus further comprises a sleeve 40, the pickup part is disposed at an end part of the sleeve (Figs. 4 and 7), the at least two pickup apparatuses are disposed in a sequentially sleeving way and are relatively telescopic, and the driving mechanism drives the at least two pickup apparatuses to extend and retract relatively, so that the at least two pickup apparatuses pick up the articles in a switching way (Figs. 1-2; [0015]).
Referring to claim 14: Polido teaches a limiting device disposed on the mounting seat to limit a displacement of the pickup apparatus [0034].
Referring to claim 16: Polido teaches the pickup part comprises a suction cup 32.
Referring to claim 17: Polido teaches a manipulator [0022] comprising the end pickup device according to claim 1.
Referring to claim 18: Polido teaches a robot [0022],comprising the manipulator according to claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 3-7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Polido, alone.
Referring to claim 3: Polido teaches the at least two pickup apparatuses comprise a first pickup apparatus 10,14 and at least one second pickup apparatus 12,16, the first pickup apparatus is fixedly disposed, the at least one second pickup apparatus sleeves inside the first pickup apparatus (Fig. 2) and is telescopic relative to the first pickup apparatus (Fig. 1), and the driving mechanism is in driving connection with the at least one second pickup apparatus and drives the at least one second pickup apparatus to extend and retract, so that the at least one second pickup apparatus and the first pickup apparatus pick up the articles in a switching way (Figs. 1-2; [0015]).
Polido does not specifically teach the at least one second pickup apparatus sleeves outside the first pickup apparatus. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have placed the at least one second pickup apparatus outside the first pickup apparatus with a reasonable expectation of success since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167.
Referring to claim 4: Polido does not specifically teach the at least two pickup apparatuses comprise at least two second pickup apparatuses. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device taught by Polido to include at least two second pickup apparatuses since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Referring to claim 5: Polido teaches the driving mechanism comprises a driving device 50 corresponding to the at least one second pickup apparatus one to one, and the driving device is in driving connection with the second pickup apparatus to drive the second pickup apparatus to extend and retract [0015].
Referring to claims 6 and 7: While Polido teaches the driving device is in driving connection with the second pickup apparatus, Polido does not specifically teach the driving device comprises a lead screw motor, and the lead screw motor is in driving connection with the second pickup apparatus, wherein the driving device further comprises a nut seat, and the nut seat connects a nut of the lead screw motor with the sleeve of the second pickup apparatus to realize driving connection between the lead screw motor and the second pickup apparatus. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the driving device taught by Polido to comprise a lead screw motor with a reasonable expectation of success since such a modification would only require a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. Further, once modified to include a lead screw motor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the driving device taught by Polido to include a nut seat that connects a nut of the lead screw motor with the sleeve of the second pickup apparatus with a reasonable expectation of success since a connection between the driving device and the second pickup apparatus is necessary for the device taught by Polido to function, and the type of connection, such as one including a nut and a nut seat, could be chosen by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Referring to claim 13: Polido teaches in the two pickup apparatuses which are adjacent to each other and are both telescopic (Figs. 1-4; [0015]), and the sleeve of the pickup apparatus is located inside. Polido does not specifically teach the sleeve of the pickup apparatus is located outside. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have placed the sleeve outside with a reasonable expectation of success since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167. Once modified this way, Polido teaches the sleeve is provided with an avoidance opening (the space inside the [now] outer sleeve) to avoid the extending and retracting of the pickup apparatus located inside.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-12 and 15 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. O’Connor et al. (US 2019/0160691 A1) also teaches a telescopic device (FIGS. 10-15) comprising double suction cups 440, 450 and an actuator 492 to drive the telescoping tubes relatively [0051-0052].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE A LOIKITH whose telephone number is (571)270-7822. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5:30pm.
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, Doug Hutton can be reached at 571-272-4137. 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.
/Catherine Loikith/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674
13 June 2026
Prosecution Insights