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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6, 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ogata (JP H10156741 A, herein referenced by the EPO English Machine Translation).
Regarding the intended use limitation “a part changing apparatus for changing a part to be changed that is fastened by a screw” in the preamble of the claim, it is noted that the prior art used in the rejection is capable of being used for this function. During examination, statements in the preamble reciting the purpose or intended use of the claimed invention must be evaluated to determine whether the recited purpose or intended use results in a structural difference (or, in the case of process claims, manipulative difference) between the claimed invention and the prior art. If so, the recitation serves to limit the claim. See, e.g., In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 938, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); In re Sinex, 309 F.2d 488, 492, 135 USPQ 302, 305 (CCPA 1962). If a prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble, then it meets the claim. See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See also MPEP § 2112 - § 2112.02.
Re Claim 1, Ogata discloses a part changing apparatus 1 for changing a part to be changed that is fastened by a screw 31, comprising: a cylindrical member 13, 18; a cylindrical member holder 11 configured to support the cylindrical member 13, 18 movably along a central axis direction; and a driver bit 5 configured to be inserted into the cylindrical member 13 so as to be axially rotatable independently of the cylindrical member 13, 18, a gap (not labeled, there is an upward arrow in the gap as shown near numeral 11 of figure 2) is provided as an air passage between an inner peripheral surface of the cylindrical member 13, 18 and an outer peripheral surface of the driver bit 5 (Pars. 0010-0019, Figs. 1-3).
Re Claim 2, Ogata discloses an urging member 14 configured to urge the cylindrical member 13 in a front end direction (Par.0014, Figs. 1 and 3).
Re Claim 3, Ogata discloses the air passage is provided in a range from a cylinder mouth (not labeled, the portion of the cylindrical member 13, 18 near numeral 13a) of the cylindrical member 13, 18 to a position a predetermined distance behind the cylinder mouth (See figure 2).
Re Claim 5, Ogata discloses a nut runner holder 2’ coupled to the cylindrical member holder 11; and a nut runner 1 detachably held by the nut runner holder 2’ for axially rotating the driver bit 5 (Par. 0010 and 0011, Fig. 1).
Re Claim 6, Ogata discloses the driver bit 5 is provided with an axial center hole (not labeled, see figure 2. Air-flow arrows are positioned about the center hole) communicating with the air passage.
Re Claim 9, Ogata discloses the cylindrical member 13, 18 is detachably attachable to the cylindrical member holder 11 (Par. 0011, Figs. 1 and 2).
Re Claim 10, Ogata discloses the cylindrical member 13, 18 includes a cylindrical member main body 13 and a nozzle portion 18 detachably attachable to the cylindrical member main body 13 (Pars. 0011 and 0013; Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 1, 4 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyamoto (JP 2011183489, herein referenced by the EPO English Machine Translation).
Re Claim 1, Miyamoto discloses a part changing apparatus 2 for changing a part to be changed that is fastened by a screw 50, comprising: a cylindrical member 36; a cylindrical member holder 34 configured to support the cylindrical member 36 movably along a central axis direction; and a driver bit 32 configured to be inserted into the cylindrical member 36 so as to be axially rotatable independently of the cylindrical member 36, a gap 36c is provided as an air passage between an inner peripheral surface of the cylindrical member 36 and an outer peripheral surface of the driver bit 32 (Pars. 0020 and 0026-0032, Figs. 1-4).
Re Claim 4, Miyamoto discloses an O-ring 42 is interposed between the cylindrical member 36 and the driver bit 32 at a position behind the air passage (Par. 0032, Figs. 1-4).
Re Claim 11, Miyamoto discloses a part changing system comprising: the part changing apparatus according to claim 1; and a robot 6 equipped with the part changing apparatus 2 at a tip of an arm of the robot 6 (Pars. 0020, 0024 and 0027, Fig. 1).
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(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogata (JP H10156741), herein referenced by the EPO English Machine Translation).
Re Claim 7, Ogata discloses an opening 21 communicating with the air passage is provided in a side wall of the cylindrical member holder 11, and an air pump device (not shown) is connected to the opening via an air hose 23 (Par. 0011, Figs. 1 and 3). Ogata does not explicitly disclose the opening is provided in a side wall of the cylindrical member.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide an opening in a side wall of the cylindrical member because Applicant has not disclosed that the claimed configuration provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose or solves a stated problem. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with either opening configuration because both perform the same function of connecting an air pump device with the part changing apparatus. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the invention of Ogata to obtain the invention as specified in claim 7.
Re Claim 8, Ogata does not explicitly disclose a switch interposed between the opening and the air pump device for switching between air suction and supply. As the air pump device is disclosed but not shown, the Examiner is of the opinion that a it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a switch interposed between the opening and the air pump device for switching between air suction and supply, as claimed, for the benefit of easily switching between air suction and supply while using the parts changing apparatus.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAYAN SALONE whose telephone number is (571)270-7739. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-60 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, David Bryant can be reached at (571)272-4526. 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.
/BAYAN SALONE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726