DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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
The amendment filed 11/20/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-10 remain pending in the application. Claims 5-8 have been withdrawn by Applicant.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/03/2025 was filed is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the electric hook is provided with a connecting ring on one end; the connecting ring is sleeved on a rotating shaft of the finger joint, as required by claim 1, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 30. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 Objections
Claims 1, 3 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 line 7 reads “direction of the rotation”, --a direction of rotation-- is suggested.
Claim 3 line 9 reads “where one end”, --wherein the one end-- is suggested.
Claim 4 line 7 reads “wherein a second”, --wherein the second-- is suggested.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-4 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 lines 7-8 recite the limitation “a rib plate is provided to serve as a limit stop for the finger joint”. However, the originally filed disclosure fails to provide any disclosure relating to a structure which limits the finger joint. Therefore, the limitation is considered new matter.
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 3-4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 3 line 3 recites the limitation “a finger joint rotating shaft”. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to “a rotating shaft of the finger joint” recited in claim 1, or if this limitation requires an additional shaft.
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.
Claim 1-4 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 102429724 A) in view of Wu (CN 112043394 A).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses an electric hook structure (see Fig. 2), including a finger joint (2-4, 2-5), a wrist joint (2-2) and a base (2-1), wherein the finger joint is provided with an electric hook (2-3), wherein a first end of the wrist joint is hinged with the finger joint (via 2-8), wherein the base is hinged with a second end of the wrist joint (via 2-7), wherein the finger joint and the wrist joint are in transmission connection through rope wheels (see Fig. 3, 6-2; 3-3, 5-2, 5-3, 5-5, 5-6, 5-7), and wherein the rope wheels are used for executing corresponding actions under an action of rope body tension transmission along direction of the rotation of the finger joint (via 5-8, 5-9), and the electric hook is provided with a connecting ring on one end (see Fig. 3, lower body ring of 3-1): the connecting ring is sleeved on a rotating shaft of the finger joint (2-8). Wang fails to disclose a rib plate. However, Wu teaches a rib plate (see Fig. 6A, rib plate). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Wang with a rib plate, as taught by Wu, to limit the rotation of the electric hook structure to prevent over-rotation and damage to the ropes and/or supporting structure. The combination above would necessarily result in the following limitations: a rib plate (Wu, Fig. 6A) is provided to serve as a limit stop for the finger joint (Wang, 2-4, 2-5).
Regarding claim 2, Wang discloses a plane of motion of the finger joint (see Fig. 7; plane of R3) and a plane of motion of the wrist joint (plane of R2) are perpendicular to each other (see Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 3, Wang discloses the rope wheels comprise a first guide wheel (5-6) and the finger joint comprises a head (2-4), a finger joint rotating shaft (see Fig. 2; 2-8) and a first twist rope (see Fig. 6-2; 5-8), wherein the first guide wheel is arranged on the head (see Fig. 5), wherein the finger joint rotating shaft penetrates through the first guide wheel and is fixed on the wrist joint (see Fig. 2 and 5), wherein the first guide wheel can rotate relative to the finger joint rotating shaft (see Fig. 3, wherein shaft 2-8 is shown as separate from wheels 3-3 and 5-6, therefore the first guide wheel and the finger joint rotating shaft are inherently capable of rotating relative to each other), wherein the first twist rope rounds the first guide wheel (see Fig. 6-2) and is in a transmission connection with the first guide wheel (5-6); wherein the first twist rope is used to drive the first guide wheel to rotate so as to realize a deflection of the electric hook (deflection R3), wherein one end of the electric hook (see Fig. 2; 2-5) is inserted in and fixedly connected with the head (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Wang discloses the rope wheels comprise a second guide wheel and the wrist joint (2-2) comprises a wrist joint body (body of 2-2), a wrist joint rotating shaft (see Fig. 2; 2-7), and a second twist rope (see Fig. 6-2; 5-9); wherein a first end of the wrist joint body is connected with the finger joint rotating shaft (see Fig. 2; 2-8), wherein the second guide wheel is integrally arranged at a second end of the wrist joint body, wherein the wrist joint rotating shaft penetrates through the second guide wheel and is fixed on the base (see Fig. 2); wherein the second guide wheel and the wrist joint rotating shaft can rotate (see Fig. 2 and 6-2; second guide wheel 5-7 and joint rotating shaft 2-7 can inherently rotate), wherein a second twist rope (5-9) rounds the second guide wheel (see Fig. 6-2) and is in a transmission connection with the second guide wheel (5-7); wherein the second twist rope is used to drive the second guide wheel to rotate to realize a rotation of the wrist joint (see Fig. 7; R2).
Regarding claim 9, Wang discloses the first twist rope (5-8) and the second twist rope (5-9) both comprise steel wire ropes (see attached English translation, wherein steel wire is disclosed).
Regarding claim 10, Wang discloses the electric hook (2-3) is an arc-shaped structure (see Fig. 2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive and/or moot in view of a new grounds of rejection. Regarding Applicant’s argument that Wang fails to disclose an electric hook provided with a connecting ring, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. As shown in Fig. 2 and 3 of Wang, the electric hook 2-3 has a ring structure at the bottom of 3-1, which rotates on shaft 2-8. Therefore, Wang discloses “the electric hook is provided with a connecting ring on one end”.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that Wang fails to disclose a rib plate, the argument has been considered, but is moot in view of the new grounds of rejection which was necessitated by the amendment.
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 JOSEPH BROWN whose telephone number is (313)446-6568. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8:00am - 5:00pm 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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 571-357-2384. 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.
/JOSEPH BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618