DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final Office Action on the merits in response to communications filed by Applicant on February 24th, 2026. Claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-11, 14, 18-21, 24, 27-28, 31-32, and 36 are currently pending and examined below.
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 amendments to the Claims, filed on February 24th, 2026, have been entered. Claims 1-2, 24, and 31 are currently amended and pending, claims 3-4, 6-7, 9-11, 14, 18-19, 27-28, 32, and 36 are as previously presented, claims 20 and 21 are original, unamended, and pending, and claims 5, 8, 12-13, 15-17, 22-23, 25-26, 29-30, 33-35, and 37 have been canceled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) filed on 02/23/2026 is/are 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 9, 24, 27-28, and 31-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3714682 A1 ("Verburggen") in view of US 9646765 B2 ("Muto") in further view of US 11642797 B2 ("Chintalapalli Patta") in further view of US 2015/0173297 A1 ("Pitzer").
Regarding claim 1, Verburggen teaches a plants management and/or treatment system comprising (Verburggen: Figure 6, Abstract, “According to an embodiment a gripping apparatus is disclosed to relocate a high-wire hook comprising a pair of opposite loops for wrapping there around a rope; and a pair of suspension hooks, a respective hook located in the proximity of a respective loop, for hanging the high-wire hook on a hanging wire; whereby the high-wire hook is configured to support a high-wire crop in horticulture by hanging the high-wire hook by one of the sus pension hooks on the hanging wire; and whereby the rope wrapped around the loops supports an ending of the high-wire crop; and wherein the gripping apparatus comprises a gripping mechanism comprising a protuberance; a robot arm coupled to the gripping mechanism; and a processing unit operatively coupled to the robot arm; and wherein the processing unit actuates the robot arm to insert the protuberance in one of the loops for relocating the high-wire hook.”):
at least one robotic arm (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074, “To rotated and translated the high-wire hook 101,102 in an efficient and automated manner, a gripping apparatus 600 is used as illustrated in Fig. 6. The illustrated gripping apparatus 600 comprises movement means 610, such as for example a pair of wheels configured to move over a rail system. The rail system is then present on the soil between rows of crops in the greenhouse. The gripping apparatus 600 further comprises a platform 606, whereupon a lifting pantograph system 605 is mounted. Thereupon a desk or work table 604 is mounted for supporting a robot arm 602. The robot arm 602 comprises, for example, two pivoting points 607 and 603, and a rotatable ending 611. At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608. The gripping apparatus further comprises a processing unit, for example housed in a box 612.”. The cited passages clearly show that the robot is coupled to an elevator actuator.)
configured to move said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device (Verburggen: Figure 3, ¶ 0072, “Such a hanging wire is illustrated in Fig. 2 and in Fig. 3. On the hanging wire 200 a plurality of high-wire hooks 201, 204 are hanged. From the high-wire hook 240 a rope 202 extends 203 for supporting a high-wire crop, such as tomatoes 300. On dedicated spots 303, 304 the hanging wire 200 itself may further be hanged on the structure of, for example, a greenhouse.”. The cited passage clearly shows that the suspension device (i.e. the high wire hooks) are placed on a cable.);
a gripper positioned at an extremity of said at least one robotic arm (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074, “The gripping apparatus 600 further comprises a platform 606, whereupon a lifting pantograph system 605 is mounted. Thereupon a desk or work table 604 is mounted for supporting a robot arm 602. The robot arm 602 comprises, for example, two pivoting points 607 and 603, and a rotatable ending 611. At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608. The gripping apparatus further comprises a processing unit, for example housed in a box 612.”. The cited passage and Figures clearly shows that the gripping mechanism is disposed at the distal end of the robotic arm.),
wherein said gripper: (a) is coupled to a rotating-actuator for controllably rotating the gripper about an axis substantially parallel to, or coinciding with, said longitudinal axis (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074, “The gripping apparatus 600 further comprises a platform 606, whereupon a lifting pantograph system 605 is mounted. Thereupon a desk or work table 604 is mounted for supporting a robot arm 602. The robot arm 602 comprises, for example, two pivoting points 607 and 603, and a rotatable ending 611. At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608. The gripping apparatus further comprises a processing unit, for example housed in a box 612.”, ¶ 0079, “By gripping the high-wire hook 102 through the supported loop 107 and the opposite loop 108, the high wire hook 102 may be lifted such that the hanging hook 105 is taken of the hanging wire 200. The high-wire hook 102 can now be rotated by the ending 611 of the robot arm 602. This way, the rope 103, 104 may be partly unwrapped for adapting the length of the rope to the condition of the crops 301, 300.”. The cited passages clearly shows that the gripping mechanism, which is disposed on the ending of the robot arm, is configured to rotate. One of ordinary skill in the art would see from the cited Figures that, based on the structure of the robot arm, the ending would rotate about the longitudinal axis of the robot arm.);
and (b) is configured to grip said suspension device between gripping members thereof and manipulate it to adjust of suspension height, and/or location of said suspension device along said cable (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074, “The gripping apparatus 600 further comprises a platform 606, whereupon a lifting pantograph system 605 is mounted. Thereupon a desk or work table 604 is mounted for supporting a robot arm 602. The robot arm 602 comprises, for example, two pivoting points 607 and 603, and a rotatable ending 611. At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608. The gripping apparatus further comprises a processing unit, for example housed in a box 612.”, ¶ 0076, “The gripping mechanism of Fig. 4 is illustrated in a front view 400, a top view 402 and a down side view 406. The gripping mechanism comprises a first support member 411 wherefrom a protuberance 404 extends. In a preferred embodiment, the protuberance 404 is slidable which is illustrated by arrow 403. The first support member 411 further comprises a stop member 408 to halt the member 404, 408 is coupled to a second support member 401, for example by a welding joint or by pivoting points. The second support member 401 comprises a slim design, meaning that one dimension 414 is considerably longer than a dimension 413 perpendicular thereupon. member 404,408 is coupled to a second support member 401, for example by a welding joint or by pivoting points. The second support member 401 comprises a slim design, meaning that one dimension 414 is considerably longer than a dimension 413 perpendicular thereupon. 411, 408. The third support member 405 may pivotably be coupled to the second support member 401 which is illustrated by the arrow 407 at the down side view 406.”, ¶ 0077, “Next, the third support member 405 is pivoted 407 to clamp or grip the high-wire hook 102 at loop 108.”, ¶ 0078, “The gripping of the high-wire hook 102 may further be facilitated by the pivoting third support member 405. In the down side view 406 it is illustrated that the third support member 405 pivots in an inward direction 407 such that the loop 108 is clasped in the zone 410.”, ¶ 0079, “By gripping the high-wire hook 102 through the supported loop 107 and the opposite loop 108, the high wire hook 102 may be lifted such that the hanging hook 105 is taken of the hanging wire 200. The high-wire hook 102 can now be rotated by the ending 611 of the robot arm 602. This way, the rope 103, 104 may be partly unwrapped for adapting the length of the rope to the condition of the crops 301, 300.”, ¶ 0080, “Subsequently or simultaneously with the one or more rotations of the high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 may translate the hook 102 along the hanging wire 200. This translation may further be combined with a translation of the gripping apparatus 600 with the movement means 610.”. One of ordinary skill in the art can clearly see from the cited passages and figures, that the disclosed robotic manipulator is configured to receive and immobilize the hook with gripping fingers and is further configured to both adjust the length of the wire attached to the hook (and therefore the height of the plant) as well as the position of the hook by manipulating said hook. Furthermore, the cited paragraphs clearly state that the ending of the robotic arm (an which the gripping mechanism is disposed), is rotated in order to effect a rotation of the hook. Additionally, Figure 4 and ¶ 0077 and 0078 clearly show that the third support members are pivoted inward in order to grip the hook.),
and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members (Verburggen: Figure 4 third support member 405, ¶ 0077, “Next, the third support member 405 is pivoted 407 to clamp or grip the high-wire hook 102 at loop 108.”, ¶ 0078, “The gripping of the high-wire hook 102 may further be facilitated by the pivoting third support member 405. In the down side view 406 it is illustrated that the third support member 405 pivots in an inward direction 407 such that the loop 108 is clasped in the zone 410.”. The cited passages clearly show that the third support members are configured to move inwardly towards one another in order to clamp the hook.);
and at least one sensing unit mounted to said at least on robot arm along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to enable (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074, “At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608.”, ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404. Next, when the protuberance 404 is inserted in the loop 107, the protuberance 404 is slid against the stop member 408.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would see that from the position of the detection means shown in Figure 6, its field of view would not be affected by the manipulator. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would see that because the sensor is mounted to the end effector, it would move reciprocally with said end effector towards or away from the suspension device.),
said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0051, “a detection means configured to detect and spatially locate a loop of a high-wire hook closest to a suspension hook for hanging on the hanging wire”, ¶ 0052, “Additionally, the gripping apparatus may comprise detection means configured to detect to loop the closest to the suspension hook used to hang the high wire hook on the hanging wire, in other words the loop which will become the supported loop. The detection means may further derive therefrom the location of the the hanging wire whereupon the high-wire hook is hanged. In other words, the location is determined with respect to a reference, for example a reference within the detection means, and/or with respect to the robot arm, and/or with respect to the gripping mechanism.”, ¶ 0053, “The detection means are further operatively connected to the processing unit. Hereby the detection means shares the data representative for the detection and spatial location of the supported loop and in case the hanging wire. In other words, the detection means cooperate with the processing unit such that the processing unit actuates the robot arm based on the data captured or retrieved by the detection means.”, ¶ 0074, “At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608.”, ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404.”. The cited passages clearly teaches that the system uses the detection means to detect the hook and uses the detection result to control the actuation of the robot. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the detection means continuously detects the hook while the robot arm approaches the hook and after the robot has approached the hook.),
and generate signals/data indicative of the detected location to cause said at least one robotic arm to reciprocally move along said longitudinal axis and manipulate said suspension device (Verburggen: ¶ 0051, “a detection means configured to detect and spatially locate a loop of a high-wire hook closest to a suspension hook for hanging on the hanging wire”, ¶ 0052, “Additionally, the gripping apparatus may comprise detection means configured to detect to loop the closest to the suspension hook used to hang the high wire hook on the hanging wire, in other words the loop which will become the supported loop. The detection means may further derive therefrom the location of the the hanging wire whereupon the high-wire hook is hanged. In other words, the location is determined with respect to a reference, for example a reference within the detection means, and/or with respect to the robot arm, and/or with respect to the gripping mechanism.”, ¶ 0053, “The detection means are further operatively connected to the processing unit. Hereby the detection means shares the data representative for the detection and spatial location of the supported loop and in case the hanging wire. In other words, the detection means cooperate with the processing unit such that the processing unit actuates the robot arm based on the data captured or retrieved by the detection means.”, ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404. Next, when the protuberance 404 is inserted in the loop 107, the protuberance 404 is slid against the stop member 408.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly see that signals are generated based on the detection result of the detection means to cause the robot to move towards the hook.).
Verburggen does not teach comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device,
wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and
(ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces;
at least one of said gripping fingers comprising friction imparting means formed on gripping surfaces configured to contact a body portion of the suspension device,
and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members by friction force.
and at least one sensing unit mounted to said rigid beam posterior to said gripper along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to enable.
Muto, in the same field of endeavor, teaches comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of elevation of said elevator actuator (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 49-56, “As shown in FIG. 1, the moving mechanism 95 is constituted of a combination of expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98 that expand in the X-axis, Y-axis, and Z-axis directions, respectively. In the expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98, followers 96c to 98c that are screwed to the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b move along longitudinal directions of the corresponding housings 96d to 98d, when the servo motors 96a to 98a are driven and the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b rotate.”, Column 7 lines 57-67, “Furthermore, the follower 96c of the expanding/ contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction is attached to the follower 97c of the expansion actuator 97 in the Z-axis direction. This enables the air cylinder 92 to move in the Z-axis direction together with the expanding/contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction.”. The cited passage clearly shows that the robotic device has a rigid beam (i.e. the follower 96c of the expanding/contracting actuator) that is configured to move by linear actuation (i.e. ball screw 96b, a ball screw is a known type of linear actuator) along a longitudinal axis that is perpendicular to the direction of elevation. One of ordinary skill in the art would have seen that because the elevator actuator (i.e. expanding/contracting actuator 97) moves in the Z direction and the expanding/contracting actuator 96 moves in the Y direction, that the rigid beam moves in a direction perpendicular to that of the direction of elevation.).
wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 49-56, “As shown in FIG. 1, the moving mechanism 95 is constituted of a combination of expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98 that expand in the X-axis, Y-axis, and Z-axis directions, respectively. In the expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98, followers 96c to 98c that are screwed to the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b move along longitudinal directions of the corresponding housings 96d to 98d, when the servo motors 96a to 98a are driven and the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b rotate.”, Column 7 lines 57-67, “Furthermore, the follower 96c of the expanding/ contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction is attached to the follower 97c of the expansion actuator 97 in the Z-axis direction. This enables the air cylinder 92 to move in the Z-axis direction together with the expanding/contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that, because the robot arm is configured to move in a direction parallel to the ground and that its longitudinal axis is parallel with the ground, the gravitational forces applied by the plant would be perpendicular to the longitudinal.), and
(ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 49-56, “As shown in FIG. 1, the moving mechanism 95 is constituted of a combination of expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98 that expand in the X-axis, Y-axis, and Z-axis directions, respectively. In the expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98, followers 96c to 98c that are screwed to the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b move along longitudinal directions of the corresponding housings 96d to 98d, when the servo motors 96a to 98a are driven and the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b rotate.”, Column 7 lines 57-67, “Furthermore, the follower 96c of the expanding/ contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction is attached to the follower 97c of the expansion actuator 97 in the Z-axis direction. This enables the air cylinder 92 to move in the Z-axis direction together with the expanding/contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly see that, because the robot can linearly expand in all three directions, the linear actuation is perpendicular to the direction of gravity.);
Verburggen teaches a plants management and/or treatment system comprising: at least one robotic arm, said suspension device is placed on a cable and supports the at least one plant coupled to the suspension device; a gripper positioned at an extremity of said at least one robotic arm wherein said gripper: (a) is coupled to a rotating-actuator for controllably rotating the gripper about an axis substantially parallel to, or coinciding with, said longitudinal axis, and (b) is configured to grip said suspension device between gripping members thereof and manipulate it to adjust of suspension height, and/or location of said suspension device along said cable, and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members; and at least one sensing unit mounted to said at least one robotic arm and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to enable, said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location, and generate signals/data indicative of the detected location to cause said at least one robotic arm to reciprocally move along said longitudinal axis and manipulate said suspension device. Verburggen does not teach comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces. Muto teaches comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to have modified the system taught in Verburggen with comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces taught in Muto. Furthermore, Verburggen already teaches an elevator mechanism and a robotic arm that moves in a direction perpendicular to the direction of elevation towards a hook hung from a wire. The only modification required is to modify the system taught in Verburggen with the a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm. Such a modification would require the simple substitution of one known actuation method for another. As such, this modification would not have changed or introduced new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required. The combination would have yielded the predictable result of a plant management and/or treatment system comprising: comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the plant management and/or treatment system taught in Verburggen with comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces taught in Muto with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination because the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Verburggen in view of Muto does not teach at least one of said gripping fingers comprising friction imparting means formed on gripping surfaces configured to contact a body portion of the suspension device,
and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members by friction force.
and at least one sensing unit mounted to said rigid beam posterior to said gripper along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to enable.
Chintalapalli Patta, in the same field of endeavor, teaches at least one of said gripping fingers comprising friction imparting means formed on gripping surfaces configured to contact a body portion of the suspension device (Chintalapalli Patta: Figure 4 friction pad 406, Column 6 line 59 – Column 7 line 7, “FIG. 4, with reference to FIGS. 1 through 3, depicts a friction pad assembly comprised in each of the plurality of grasping clamps of the gripper apparatus 100 of FIG. 1, in accordance with an embodiment of the present disclosure. More specifically, FIG. 4 depicts a sliding friction pad attached to a corresponding inner surface of each of the plurality of grasping clamps 108A-F. For instance, as can be depicted in FIG. 4, the friction pad assembly 112A F comprises a linear rail 402, a force sensor array 404, a friction pad 406, and a pair of sliders 408A-B.”).
and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members by friction force (Chintalapalli Patta: Figure 4 friction pad 406, Column 6 line 59 – Column 7 line 7, “FIG. 4, with reference to FIGS. 1 through 3, depicts a friction pad assembly comprised in each of the plurality of grasping clamps of the gripper apparatus 100 of FIG. 1, in accordance with an embodiment of the present disclosure. More specifically, FIG. 4 depicts a sliding friction pad attached to a corresponding inner surface of each of the plurality of grasping clamps 108A-F. For instance, as can be depicted in FIG. 4, the friction pad assembly 112A F comprises a linear rail 402, a force sensor array 404, a friction pad 406, and a pair of sliders 408A-B.”. The cited passage clearly states that the gripping mechanism uses friction pads to grip an object by friction force.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the plant management and/or treatment system taught in Verburggen with at least one of said gripping fingers comprising friction imparting means formed thereon taught in Chintalapalli Patta with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination would have required the simple addition of known components. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been familiar with adding an element to an end effector to increase the amount of friction applied and would have add the technological capabilities required to do so. Furthermore, the end effector taught in Verburggen is already configured with gripping fingers that move relative to one another in order to grip the hook. As such, the modification would consist of simply adding the friction element taught in Chintalapalli Patta according to known method. Such a modification would not have changed or introduced new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required.
Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta does not teach and at least one sensing unit mounted to said rigid beam posterior to said gripper along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to enable.
Pitzer, in the same field of endeavor, teaches and at least one sensing unit mounted to said rigid beam posterior to said gripper along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to enable (Pitzer: Figure 1, Figure 12, imaging sensors 1290 and 1291, ¶ 0064, “In several embodiments, carrier assembly 170 can include rails 1279 and 1280, which can allow carriage attachment base 1284 and/or foliage displacement base 1281 to adjustably slide radially inward and outward with respect to mounting bearing 1274. In many embodiments, carrier assembly 170 can include one or more imaging sensors 1290 and/or 1291. Imaging sensors 1290 and/or 1291 can be cameras configured to detect optical image information. In a number of embodiments, carrier assembly 1271 can include an electronics unit 1271. In some embodiments, electronics unit 1271 can include a control unit 1272 and/or a processing unit 1273. In a number of embodiments, processing unit 1273 can include one or more processors configured to receive information from imaging sensors 1290 and/or 1291 to deter mine the location of the crops to be harvested. For example, processing unit can be configured to determine that certain crops are ripe and ready to be harvested, and other crops are not yet ripe or are damaged, and should not be harvested. In various embodiments, control unit 1272 can be electrically coupled to processing unit 1273 and/or can include one or more controllers to control the motors in harvesting robot 100, such as motor 646 (FIGS. 6-8), motor 653 (FIGS. 6-8), motor 654 (FIG. 6-8), motor 1275 (FIGS. 12-13), and/or motor 1276 (FIGS. 12-13).”. The cited passages clearly teaches an imaging sensor disposed on the rigid beam (i.e. the rails 1279 and 1280) posterior to an end effector.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta with and at least one sensing unit mounted to said rigid beam posterior to said gripper along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to enable taught in Pitzer with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because it would have been obvious to try. The modification requires simply moving the sensor from the end effector as taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta to the rigid beam of the arm as taught in Pitzer. Such a modification of changing the location of a sensor would have been obvious to try to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such a modification would not have changed or introduced new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required.
Regarding claim 2, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches wherein the gripper is configured to release a portion of a twine/wire spooled on some portion of the suspension device, or to spool a portion of the released twine/wire therefrom, for the adjusting of the suspension height of the at least one plant coupled to a free end of said twine/wire (Verburggen: ¶ 0079, “By gripping the high-wire hook 102 through the supported loop 107 and the opposite loop 108, the high wire hook 102 may be lifted such that the hanging hook 105 is taken of the hanging wire 200. The high-wire hook 102 can now be rotated by the ending 611 of the robot arm 602. This way, the rope 103, 104 may be partly unwrapped for adapting the length of the rope to the condition of the crops 301, 300.”).
Regarding claim 3, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches comprising either an adjustable mast or a scissor elevation mechanism, configured to elevate or lower the at least one robotic arm system (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074, “The gripping apparatus 600 further comprises a platform 606, whereupon a lifting pantograph system 605 is mounted.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would see that the lifting pantograph is a scissor lift.).
Regarding claim 4, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches wherein each robotic arm system is directly coupled to one or both of a respective horizontal and a respective vertical rail for sliding motion thereover (Verburggen: ¶ 0074, “The illustrated gripping apparatus 600 comprises movement means 610, such as for example a pair of wheels configured to move over a rail system. The rail system is then present on the soil between rows of crops in the greenhouse.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would see that because the robotic arm is directly coupled to the movement means, it is directly coupled to the rail system.).
Regarding claim 7, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches comprising an arm rotating unit configured to apply yaw rotatory motion to the at least one robotic arm (Verburggen: ¶ 0022, “It should be further understood that the robot arm comprise a mechanical arm configured to perform rotational motions and/or translational movements. The robot arm may thus comprise a bar between the gripping mechanism and the processing unit, and may further comprise more complex configurations, such as one or more hinge or pivoting points, a chain of links moveable by joints actuated by motors, and/or telescopically extendable bars.”, ¶ 0079, “By gripping the high-wire hook 102 through the supported loop 107 and the opposite loop 108, the high wire hook 102 may be lifted such that the hanging hook 105 is taken of the hanging wire 200. The high-wire hook 102 can now be rotated by the ending 611 of the robot arm 602. This way, the rope 103, 104 may be partly unwrapped for adapting the length of the rope to the condition of the crops 301, 300.”).
Regarding claim 9, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches comprising a movable platform configured to move the at least one robotic arm substantially in parallel to the cable (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074, “The illustrated gripping apparatus 600 comprises movement means 610, such as for example a pair of wheels configured to move over a rail system. The rail system is then present on the soil between rows of crops in the greenhouse.”).
Regarding claim 24, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches wherein at least one of the gripping members comprises at least one of the following: a recess configured to receive a portion of the detected suspension device to thereby grip and immobilize said suspension device by the gripper; one or more projections configured to receive a portion of the detected suspension device to thereby grip and immobilize said suspension device by the gripper; and complementary male-female gripping elements configured to receive a portion of the detected suspension to thereby grip and immobilize said suspension device by the gripper (Verburggen: Figure 4 and 5, ¶ 0077, “The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404. Next, when the protuberance 404 is inserted in the loop 107, the protuberance 404 is slid against the stop member 408. This way, the hook is gripped at one side 415 of the gripping mechanism via the supported loop 107. Next, The gripping mechanism is actuated by the processing unit such that the third support member405 with the zone 410 pushes against the opposite loop 108. The high-wire hook 102 will then be positioned with its longitudinal direction in line with line 409. The side 109 of the high-wire hook 102 will further point to the second support member 401 and pushing against it, or vice versa. This way the hooks 105 and 106 remain free. Likewise, the wrapped rope 103 also remains free for unwrapping it. Next, the third support member 405 is pivoted 407 to clamp or grip the high-wire hook 102 at loop 108. The distance between the zone 415 of the first support member 411, 408 and zone 410 of the third support member 405 thus corresponds to the distance between the two loops 107 and 108. This is illustrated by distance 412. It should thus be understood that this distance may vary depending on the type of high-wire hook that is used to support different types of crops. The high-wire hook 102 is thus gripped by the gripping mechanism 400, whereby the suspension hooks 105, 106 are pointing away from the surface of the second support member 401.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would see that the cited passage clearly teaches one or more projections configured to receive a portion of the detected suspension device to thereby grip and immobilize said suspension device by the manipulator).
Regarding claim 27, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches wherein the gripper comprises a locking pin controllably movable for insertion into a loop of the suspension device (Verburggen: ¶ 0077, “The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404. Next, when the protuberance 404 is inserted in the loop 107, the protuberance 404 is slid against the stop member 408. This way, the hook is gripped at one side 415 of the gripping mechanism via the supported loop 107.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would see that the protuberance is functionally the same as the locking pin.).
Regarding claim 28, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches comprising at least one of the following: one or more sensors configured to indicate receipt of the suspension device therein, and placement of its loop over passage of the locking pin; a controllably movable immobilizing element configured to anteriorly push an upper portion of the suspension device and rotate the same about the locking pin; and an abutment structure configured to stop movement of lower portions of the suspension caused due to the movable immobilizing element (Verburggen: Figure 5, ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404. Next, when the protuberance 404 is inserted in the loop 107, the protuberance 404 is slid against the stop member 408.”, ¶ 0079, “By gripping the high-wire hook 102 through the supported loop 107 and the opposite loop 108, the high wire hook 102 may be lifted such that the hanging hook 105 is taken of the hanging wire 200. The high-wire hook 102 can now be rotated by the ending 611 of the robot arm 602. This way, the rope 103, 104 may be partly unwrapped for adapting the length of the rope to the condition of the crops 301, 300.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would see that the proturbance clearly function as a locking pin that is used to rotate the suspension device about.).
Regarding claim 31, Verburggen teaches a method for automated plants management and/or treatment, the method comprising (Verburggen: Abstract, “According to an embodiment a gripping apparatus is disclosed to relocate a high-wire hook comprising a pair of opposite loops for wrapping there around a rope; and a pair of suspension hooks, a respective hook located in the proximity of a respective loop, for hanging the high-wire hook on a hanging wire; whereby the high-wire hook is configured to support a high-wire crop in horticulture by hanging the high-wire hook by one of the sus pension hooks on the hanging wire; and whereby the rope wrapped around the loops supports an ending of the high-wire crop; and wherein the gripping apparatus comprises a gripping mechanism comprising a protuberance; a robot arm coupled to the gripping mechanism; and a processing unit operatively coupled to the robot arm; and wherein the processing unit actuates the robot arm to insert the protuberance in one of the loops for relocating the high-wire hook.”):
moving a robotic arm along a cable (Verburggen: ¶ 0074, “The illustrated gripping apparatus 600 comprises movement means 610, such as for example a pair of wheels configured to move over a rail system. The rail system is then present on the soil between rows of crops in the greenhouse.”, ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404. Next, when the protuberance 404 is inserted in the loop 107, the protuberance 404 is slid against the stop member 408.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would see from the cited passages that the robotic arm is moved along a cable.);
detecting by at least one sensing unit a location of the suspension device suspended from the cable (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074, “At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608.”, ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404.”),
said at least one sensing unit mounted to said at least one robotic arm and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis to thereby enable (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074, “At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608.”, ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404. Next, when the protuberance 404 is inserted in the loop 107, the protuberance 404 is slid against the stop member 408.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would see that from the position of the detection means shown in Figure 6, its field of view would not be affected by the manipulator. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would see that because the sensor is mounted to the end effector, it would move reciprocally with said end effector towards or away from the suspension device.),
said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074, “At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608.”, ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the detection means continuously detects the hook while the robot arm approaches the hook.),
moving a gripper device along said longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards the suspension device (Figure 6, ¶ 0074, “To rotated and translated the high-wire hook 101,102 in an efficient and automated manner, a gripping apparatus 600 is used as illustrated in Fig. 6. The illustrated gripping apparatus 600 comprises movement means 610, such as for example a pair of wheels configured to move over a rail system. The rail system is then present on the soil between rows of crops in the greenhouse. The gripping apparatus 600 further comprises a platform 606, whereupon a lifting pantograph system 605 is mounted. Thereupon a desk or work table 604 is mounted for supporting a robot arm 602. The robot arm 602 comprises, for example, two pivoting points 607 and 603, and a rotatable ending 611. At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608. The gripping apparatus further comprises a processing unit, for example housed in a box 612.” ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404. Next, when the protuberance 404 is inserted in the loop 107, the protuberance 404 is slid against the stop member 408.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would see from the cited passages that the manipulator is configured to move along a longitudinal axis in order to grasp the hook.),
wherein said gripper: a) is coupled to said at least one sensing unit to thereby enable said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0051, “a detection means configured to detect and spatially locate a loop of a high-wire hook closest to a suspension hook for hanging on the hanging wire”, ¶ 0052, “Additionally, the gripping apparatus may comprise detection means configured to detect to loop the closest to the suspension hook used to hang the high wire hook on the hanging wire, in other words the loop which will become the supported loop. The detection means may further derive therefrom the location of the the hanging wire whereupon the high-wire hook is hanged. In other words, the location is determined with respect to a reference, for example a reference within the detection means, and/or with respect to the robot arm, and/or with respect to the gripping mechanism.”, ¶ 0053, “The detection means are further operatively connected to the processing unit. Hereby the detection means shares the data representative for the detection and spatial location of the supported loop and in case the hanging wire. In other words, the detection means cooperate with the processing unit such that the processing unit actuates the robot arm based on the data captured or retrieved by the detection means.”, ¶ 0074, “At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608.”, ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404.”. The cited passages clearly teaches that the system uses the detection means to detect the hook and uses the detection result to control the actuation of the robot. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the detection means continuously detects the hook while the robot arm approaches the hook and after the robot has approached the hook.),
(b) is coupled to a rotating-actuator for controllably rotating the gripper about an axis substantially parallel to, or coinciding with, said longitudinal axis (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074, “The gripping apparatus 600 further comprises a platform 606, whereupon a lifting pantograph system 605 is mounted. Thereupon a desk or work table 604 is mounted for supporting a robot arm 602. The robot arm 602 comprises, for example, two pivoting points 607 and 603, and a rotatable ending 611. At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608. The gripping apparatus further comprises a processing unit, for example housed in a box 612.”, ¶ 0079, “By gripping the high-wire hook 102 through the supported loop 107 and the opposite loop 108, the high wire hook 102 may be lifted such that the hanging hook 105 is taken of the hanging wire 200. The high-wire hook 102 can now be rotated by the ending 611 of the robot arm 602. This way, the rope 103, 104 may be partly unwrapped for adapting the length of the rope to the condition of the crops 301, 300.”. The cited passages clearly shows that the gripping mechanism, which is disposed on the ending of the robot arm, is configured to rotate. One of ordinary skill in the art would see from the cited Figures that, based on the structure of the robot arm, the ending would rotate about the longitudinal axis of the robot arm.);
changing said gripper device into a gripping state by moving at least one gripping member of said gripper device towards another gripping member thereof, for squeezing and immobilizing said suspension device therein between said gripping members (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074, “The gripping apparatus 600 further comprises a platform 606, whereupon a lifting pantograph system 605 is mounted. Thereupon a desk or work table 604 is mounted for supporting a robot arm 602. The robot arm 602 comprises, for example, two pivoting points 607 and 603, and a rotatable ending 611. At the ending 611 of the robot arm 602 a gripping mechanism 601 is mounted, together with detection means 608. The gripping apparatus further comprises a processing unit, for example housed in a box 612.”, ¶ 0076, “The gripping mechanism of Fig. 4 is illustrated in a front view 400, a top view 402 and a down side view 406. The gripping mechanism comprises a first support member 411 wherefrom a protuberance 404 extends. In a preferred embodiment, the protuberance 404 is slidable which is illustrated by arrow 403. The first support member 411 further comprises a stop member 408 to halt the member 404, 408 is coupled to a second support member 401, for example by a welding joint or by pivoting points. The second support member 401 comprises a slim design, meaning that one dimension 414 is considerably longer than a dimension 413 perpendicular thereupon. member 404,408 is coupled to a second support member 401, for example by a welding joint or by pivoting points. The second support member 401 comprises a slim design, meaning that one dimension 414 is considerably longer than a dimension 413 perpendicular thereupon. 411, 408. The third support member 405 may pivotably be coupled to the second support member 401 which is illustrated by the arrow 407 at the down side view 406.”, ¶ 0077, “Next, the third support member 405 is pivoted 407 to clamp or grip the high-wire hook 102 at loop 108.”, ¶ 0078, “The gripping of the high-wire hook 102 may further be facilitated by the pivoting third support member 405. In the down side view 406 it is illustrated that the third support member 405 pivots in an inward direction 407 such that the loop 108 is clasped in the zone 410.”, ¶ 0079, “By gripping the high-wire hook 102 through the supported loop 107 and the opposite loop 108, the high wire hook 102 may be lifted such that the hanging hook 105 is taken of the hanging wire 200. The high-wire hook 102 can now be rotated by the ending 611 of the robot arm 602. This way, the rope 103, 104 may be partly unwrapped for adapting the length of the rope to the condition of the crops 301, 300.”, ¶ 0080, “Subsequently or simultaneously with the one or more rotations of the high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 may translate the hook 102 along the hanging wire 200. This translation may further be combined with a translation of the gripping apparatus 600 with the movement means 610.”. One of ordinary skill in the art can clearly see from the cited passages and figures, that the disclosed robotic manipulator is configured to receive and immobilize the hook with gripping fingers and is further configured to both adjust the length of the wire attached to the hook (and therefore the height of the plant) as well as the position of the hook by manipulating said hook. Additionally, Figure 4 and ¶ 0077 and 0078 clearly show that the third support members are configured to move inwardly towards one another in order to clamp the hook.);
and manipulating said suspension device by at least one of robotic arm and said gripper device for adjusting at least one of suspension height of a plant coupled to said suspension device, or location of said suspension device along said cable (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0079, “By gripping the high-wire hook 102 through the supported loop 107 and the opposite loop 108, the high wire hook 102 may be lifted such that the hanging hook 105 is taken of the hanging wire 200. The high-wire hook 102 can now be rotated by the ending 611 of the robot arm 602. This way, the rope 103, 104 may be partly unwrapped for adapting the length of the rope to the condition of the crops 301, 300.”, ¶ 0080, “Subsequently or simultaneously with the one or more rotations of the high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 may translate the hook 102 along the hanging wire 200. This translation may further be combined with a translation of the gripping apparatus 600 with the movement means 610.”. One of ordinary skill in the art can clearly see from the cited passages and figures, that the disclosed robotic manipulator is configured to both adjust the length of the wire attached to the hook (and therefore the height of the plant) as well as the position of the hook by manipulating said hook.).
Verburggen does not teach said robotic arm comprising a rigid beam configured to be reciprocally moved by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards or away a suspension device hanging from said cable in a direction substantially perpendicular to an elevation direction of said robotic arm,
moving by said linear actuation a gripper device coupled to said rigid beam in a non-gripping state thereof along said longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards the suspension device,
wherein said gripper: a) is coupled to said rigid bean anterior to said at least one sensing unit to thereby enable said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location,
at least one of said gripping members comprising friction imparting means formed on gripping surfaces configured to contact a body portion of the suspension device,
for squeezing and immobilizing said suspension device therein between said gripping members by friction force;
wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that: (i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and
(ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces;
Muto, in the same field of endeavor, teaches said robotic arm comprising a rigid beam configured to be reciprocally moved by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards or away a suspension device hanging from said cable in a direction substantially perpendicular to an elevation direction of said robotic arm (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 49-56, “As shown in FIG. 1, the moving mechanism 95 is constituted of a combination of expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98 that expand in the X-axis, Y-axis, and Z-axis directions, respectively. In the expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98, followers 96c to 98c that are screwed to the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b move along longitudinal directions of the corresponding housings 96d to 98d, when the servo motors 96a to 98a are driven and the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b rotate.”, Column 7 lines 57-67, “Furthermore, the follower 96c of the expanding/ contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction is attached to the follower 97c of the expansion actuator 97 in the Z-axis direction. This enables the air cylinder 92 to move in the Z-axis direction together with the expanding/contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction.”. The cited passage clearly shows that the robotic device has a rigid beam (i.e. the follower 96c of the expanding/contracting actuator) that is configured to move by linear actuation (i.e. ball screw 96b, a ball screw is a known type of linear actuator) along a longitudinal axis that is perpendicular to the direction of elevation. One of ordinary skill in the art would have seen that because the elevator actuator (i.e. expanding/contracting actuator 97) moves in the Z direction and the expanding/contracting actuator 96 moves in the Y direction, that the rigid beam moves in a direction perpendicular to that of the direction of elevation.).
moving by said linear actuation a gripper device coupled to said rigid beam in a non-gripping state thereof along said longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards the suspension device (Muto: Figure 1 hook hand 91, expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 19-27, “The winding device 1 includes a wire drawing-out mechanism 90 that draws out the wire 2 from the edge of the coil 10 and hooks the wire 2 on each of the hook rods 68 during the forming process of the coil 10. As shown in FIG. 1, the wire drawing-out mechanism 90 includes a hook hand 91 that can hook the wire 2 hooked across the edge of the coil 10 and the nozzle 4 onto the hook rod 68, and a moving mechanism 95 that enables the hook hand 91 to move in the directions of the three axes.”, Column 7 lines 49-56, “As shown in FIG. 1, the moving mechanism 95 is constituted of a combination of expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98 that expand in the X-axis, Y-axis, and Z-axis directions, respectively. In the expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98, followers 96c to 98c that are screwed to the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b move along longitudinal directions of the corresponding housings 96d to 98d, when the servo motors 96a to 98a are driven and the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b rotate.”, Column 7 lines 57-67, “Furthermore, the follower 96c of the expanding/ contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction is attached to the follower 97c of the expansion actuator 97 in the Z-axis direction. This enables the air cylinder 92 to move in the Z-axis direction together with the expanding/contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction.”. The cited passages clearly show that the gripping device is mounted to a rigid beam and is moved by the linear actuator.),
wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 49-56, “As shown in FIG. 1, the moving mechanism 95 is constituted of a combination of expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98 that expand in the X-axis, Y-axis, and Z-axis directions, respectively. In the expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98, followers 96c to 98c that are screwed to the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b move along longitudinal directions of the corresponding housings 96d to 98d, when the servo motors 96a to 98a are driven and the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b rotate.”, Column 7 lines 57-67, “Furthermore, the follower 96c of the expanding/ contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction is attached to the follower 97c of the expansion actuator 97 in the Z-axis direction. This enables the air cylinder 92 to move in the Z-axis direction together with the expanding/contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that, because the robot arm is configured to move in a direction parallel to the ground and that its longitudinal axis is parallel with the ground, the gravitational forces applied by the plant would be perpendicular to the longitudinal.), and
(ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 49-56, “As shown in FIG. 1, the moving mechanism 95 is constituted of a combination of expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98 that expand in the X-axis, Y-axis, and Z-axis directions, respectively. In the expanding/contracting actuators 96 to 98, followers 96c to 98c that are screwed to the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b move along longitudinal directions of the corresponding housings 96d to 98d, when the servo motors 96a to 98a are driven and the corresponding ball screws 96b to 98b rotate.”, Column 7 lines 57-67, “Furthermore, the follower 96c of the expanding/ contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction is attached to the follower 97c of the expansion actuator 97 in the Z-axis direction. This enables the air cylinder 92 to move in the Z-axis direction together with the expanding/contracting actuator 96 in the Y-axis direction.”. One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly see that, because the robot can linearly expand in all three directions, the linear actuation is perpendicular to the direction of gravity.);
Verburggen teaches a method for automated plants management and/or treatment, the method comprising: moving a robotic arm along a cable; detecting by at least one sensing unit a location of the suspension device suspended from the cable, said at least one sensing unit mounted to said at least one robotic arm and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis to thereby enable, said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements, moving a gripper device along said longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards the suspension device, wherein said gripper: a) is coupled to said at least one sensing unit to thereby enable said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location, (b) is coupled to a rotating-actuator for controllably rotating the gripper about an axis substantially parallel to, or coinciding with, said longitudinal axis; changing said gripper device into a gripping state by moving at least one gripping member of said gripper device towards another gripping member thereof, for squeezing and immobilizing said suspension device therein between said gripping members; and manipulating said suspension device by at least one of robotic arm and said gripper device for adjusting at least one of suspension height of a plant coupled to said suspension device, or location of said suspension device along said cable. Verburggen does not teach said robotic arm comprising a rigid beam configured to be reciprocally moved by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards or away a suspension device hanging from said cable in a direction substantially perpendicular to an elevation direction of said robotic arm, moving by said linear actuation a gripper device coupled to said rigid beam in a non-gripping state thereof along said longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards the suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces. Muto teaches said robotic arm comprising a rigid beam configured to be reciprocally moved by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards or away a suspension device hanging from said cable in a direction substantially perpendicular to an elevation direction of said robotic arm, moving by said linear actuation a gripper device coupled to said rigid beam in a non-gripping state thereof along said longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards the suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to have modified the system taught in Verburggen with said robotic arm comprising a rigid beam configured to be reciprocally moved by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards or away a suspension device hanging from said cable in a direction substantially perpendicular to an elevation direction of said robotic arm, moving by said linear actuation a gripper device coupled to said rigid beam in a non-gripping state thereof along said longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards the suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces taught in Muto. Furthermore, Verburggen already teaches an elevator mechanism and a robotic arm that moves in a direction perpendicular to the direction of elevation towards a hook hung from a wire. The only modification required is to modify the system taught in Verburggen with the a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm. Such a modification would require the simple substitution of one known actuation method for another. As such, this modification would not have changed or introduced new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required. The combination would have yielded the predictable result of a method comprising: said robotic arm comprising a rigid beam configured to be reciprocally moved by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards or away a suspension device hanging from said cable in a direction substantially perpendicular to an elevation direction of said robotic arm, moving by said linear actuation a gripper device coupled to said rigid beam in a non-gripping state thereof along said longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards the suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the method taught in Verburggen with said robotic arm comprising a rigid beam configured to be reciprocally moved by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards or away a suspension device hanging from said cable in a direction substantially perpendicular to an elevation direction of said robotic arm, moving by said linear actuation a gripper device coupled to said rigid beam in a non-gripping state thereof along said longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards the suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces taught in Muto with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination because the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Verburggen in view of Muto does not teach wherein said gripper: a) is coupled to said rigid bean anterior to said at least one sensing unit to thereby enable said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location,
at least one of said gripping members comprising friction imparting means formed on gripping surfaces configured to contact a body portion of the suspension device,
for squeezing and immobilizing said suspension device therein between said gripping members by friction force.
Chintalapalli Patta, in the same field of endeavor, teaches by at least one of said gripping members comprising friction imparting means formed on gripping surfaces configured to contact a body portion of the suspension device (Chintalapalli Patta: Figure 4 friction pad 406, Column 6 line 59 – Column 7 line 7, “FIG. 4, with reference to FIGS. 1 through 3, depicts a friction pad assembly comprised in each of the plurality of grasping clamps of the gripper apparatus 100 of FIG. 1, in accordance with an embodiment of the present disclosure. More specifically, FIG. 4 depicts a sliding friction pad attached to a corresponding inner surface of each of the plurality of grasping clamps 108A-F. For instance, as can be depicted in FIG. 4, the friction pad assembly 112A F comprises a linear rail 402, a force sensor array 404, a friction pad 406, and a pair of sliders 408A-B.”),
for squeezing and immobilizing said suspension device therein between said gripping members by friction force (Chintalapalli Patta: Figure 4 friction pad 406, Column 6 line 59 – Column 7 line 7, “FIG. 4, with reference to FIGS. 1 through 3, depicts a friction pad assembly comprised in each of the plurality of grasping clamps of the gripper apparatus 100 of FIG. 1, in accordance with an embodiment of the present disclosure. More specifically, FIG. 4 depicts a sliding friction pad attached to a corresponding inner surface of each of the plurality of grasping clamps 108A-F. For instance, as can be depicted in FIG. 4, the friction pad assembly 112A F comprises a linear rail 402, a force sensor array 404, a friction pad 406, and a pair of sliders 408A-B.”. The cited passage clearly states that the gripping mechanism uses friction pads to grip an object by friction force.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the method taught in Verburggen with by friction imparting means provided on at least one of said gripping fingers taught in Chintalapalli Patta with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination would have required the simple addition of known components. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been familiar with adding an element to an end effector to increase the amount of friction applied and would have add the technological capabilities required to do so. Furthermore, the end effector taught in Verburggen is already configured with gripping fingers that move relative to one another in order to grip the hook. As such, the modification would consist of simply adding the friction element taught in Chintalapalli Patta according to known method. Such a modification would not have changed or introduced new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required.
Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta does not teach wherein said gripper: a) is coupled to said rigid bean anterior to said at least one sensing unit to thereby enable said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location.
Pitzer, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein said gripper: a) is coupled to said rigid bean anterior to said at least one sensing unit to thereby enable said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location (Pitzer: Figure 1, Figure 12, imaging sensors 1290 and 1291, ¶ 0064, “In several embodiments, carrier assembly 170 can include rails 1279 and 1280, which can allow carriage attachment base 1284 and/or foliage displacement base 1281 to adjustably slide radially inward and outward with respect to mounting bearing 1274. In many embodiments, carrier assembly 170 can include one or more imaging sensors 1290 and/or 1291. Imaging sensors 1290 and/or 1291 can be cameras configured to detect optical image information. In a number of embodiments, carrier assembly 1271 can include an electronics unit 1271. In some embodiments, electronics unit 1271 can include a control unit 1272 and/or a processing unit 1273. In a number of embodiments, processing unit 1273 can include one or more processors configured to receive information from imaging sensors 1290 and/or 1291 to deter mine the location of the crops to be harvested. For example, processing unit can be configured to determine that certain crops are ripe and ready to be harvested, and other crops are not yet ripe or are damaged, and should not be harvested. In various embodiments, control unit 1272 can be electrically coupled to processing unit 1273 and/or can include one or more controllers to control the motors in harvesting robot 100, such as motor 646 (FIGS. 6-8), motor 653 (FIGS. 6-8), motor 654 (FIG. 6-8), motor 1275 (FIGS. 12-13), and/or motor 1276 (FIGS. 12-13).”. The cited passages clearly teaches an imaging sensor disposed on the rigid beam (i.e. the rails 1279 and 1280) posterior to an end effector.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta with wherein said gripper: a) is coupled to said rigid bean anterior to said at least one sensing unit to thereby enable said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location taught in Pitzer with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because it would have been obvious to try. The modification requires simply moving the sensor from the end effector as taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta to the rigid beam of the arm as taught in Pitzer. Such a modification of changing the location of a sensor would have been obvious to try to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such a modification would not have changed or introduced new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required.
Regarding claim 32, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches wherein the manipulating of the suspension device by the gripper device includes releasing a portion of a twine/wire spooled over a portion of the suspension device, or spooling a portion of the released twine/wire, for adjusting suspension height of the at least one plant, and/or receiving weight measurement data/signals for each of the plants supported by the suspension device manipulated by the at least one robotic arm (Verburggen: ¶ 0079, “By gripping the high-wire hook 102 through the supported loop 107 and the opposite loop 108, the high wire hook 102 may be lifted such that the hanging hook 105 is taken of the hanging wire 200. The high-wire hook 102 can now be rotated by the ending 611 of the robot arm 602. This way, the rope 103, 104 may be partly unwrapped for adapting the length of the rope to the condition of the crops 301, 300.”).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3714682 A1 ("Verburggen") in view of US 9646765 B2 ("Muto") in further view of US 11642797 B2 ("Chintalapalli Patta") in further view of US 2015/0173297 A1 ("Pitzer") in further view of US 9827672 B2 ("Miyazawa") .
Regarding claim 6, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer does not teach comprising two robotic arm systems configured to simultaneously manipulate suspension devices located on respective two different cables at two opposing sides of said system.
Miyazawa, in the same field of endeavor, teaches comprising two robotic arm systems configured to simultaneously manipulate suspension devices located on respective two different cables at two opposing sides of said system (Miyazawa: Figure 1, Column 3 lines 35-67, “FIG. 1 is a schematic front view showing a structure of a double-arm robot 1000 including a piezoelectric drive device 1300 according to an embodiment of the invention. As shown in FIG. 1, the double-arm robot 1000 includes a main body portion 1190. In addition, a pair of arm portions 1200 which is connected to the main body portion 1190 is installed. In each arm portion 1200, a shoulder joint portion 1210, a first link portion 1220, an elbow joint portion 1230, a second link portion 1240, a wrist joint portion 1250, and a robot hand 1260 are installed in this order from the main body portion 1190 side.”).
Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches a plant management system, but does not teach two robotic arm systems configured to simultaneously manipulate suspension devices located on respective two different cables at two opposing sides of said system. Miyazawa, in the same field of endeavor, teaches two robotic arm systems configured to simultaneously manipulate suspension devices located on respective two different cables at two opposing sides of said system. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to have combine the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with the two robotic arm systems configured to simultaneously manipulate suspension devices located on respective two different cables at two opposing sides of said system taught in Miyazawa. Furthermore, modifying the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer to include a second robotic arm that operates on the opposite side as taught in Miyazawa only requires adding a duplicate of the already existing robotic arm. Such a modification would not change or introduce new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required. The combination would have yielded the predictable result of a plant management system with two robotic arm systems configured to simultaneously manipulate suspension devices located on respective two different cables at two opposing sides of said system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with the two robotic arm systems configured to simultaneously manipulate suspension devices located on respective two different cables at two opposing sides of said system taught Miyazawa with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because it would have yielded predictable results.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3714682 A1 ("Verburggen") in view of US 9646765 B2 ("Muto") in further view of US 11642797 B2 ("Chintalapalli Patta") in further view of US 2015/0173297 A1 ("Pitzer") in further view of US 11832569 B2 ("Coffin").
Regarding claim 10, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer does not teach comprising a catcher assembly configured to catch plants and/or suspension devices accidentally detached from the gripper and/or the cable.
Coffin, in the same field of endeavor, teaches comprising a catcher assembly configured to catch plants and/or suspension devices accidentally detached from the gripper and/or the cable (Coffin: Figure 17A, Column 15 lines 61-67, “Catch plate 1718, in one implementation, may attach only to bottom gripper assembly 1606. Catch plate 1718 may act as a safety catch in case the gripper assemblies fail or the grow tower 50 slips.”).
Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches a plant management system but does not teach a catcher assembly. Coffin, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a catcher assembly. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to have modified the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with the catcher assembly taught in Coffin. Furthermore, the catcher assembly taught in Coffin is already attached to the manipulator of a robotic arm, so modifying the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta, which consists of a robotic arm with a manipulator at its end, would not change or introduce new functionality to either. No inventive effort would have been required. The combination would have yielded the predictable result of a robotic arm with a catcher assembly at its end effector.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with catcher assembly taught in Coffin with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3714682 A1 ("Verburggen") in view of US 9646765 B2 ("Muto") in further view of US 11642797 B2 ("Chintalapalli Patta") in further view of US 2015/0173297 A1 ("Pitzer") in further view of US 11832569 B2 ("Coffin") in further view of US 4593515 ("Margaf").
Regarding claim 11, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Coffin does not teach comprising a sensing device configured to detect engagement of the catcher assembly with a plant and/or suspension device,
wherein the system is configured to halt the system upon detection of accident release of the suspension device from the gripper.
Margaf, in the same field of endeavor, teaches comprising a sensing device configured to detect engagement of the catcher assembly with a plant and/or suspension device (Margaf: Column 5 lines 4-22, “The dropped-article sensing means catches articles dropped from the conveyor path and generates a wrapping machine stop signal or interrupt in response to a dropped article whereby the dropped article must be retrieved before restarting the wrapping machine and the dropped article may be salvaged.”),
wherein the system is configured to halt the system upon detection of accident release of the suspension device from the gripper (Margaf: Column 5 lines 4-22).
Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Coffin teaches a plant management device but does not teach a sensing device configured to detect engagement of the catcher assembly with a plant and/or suspension device, wherein the system is configured to halt the system upon detection of accident release of the suspension device from the gripper. Margaf teaches a sensing device configured to detect engagement of the catcher assembly with a plant and/or suspension device, wherein the system is configured to halt the system upon detection of accident release of the suspension device from the gripper. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to have modified the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Coffin with a sensing device configured to detect engagement of the catcher assembly with a plant and/or suspension device, wherein the system is configured to halt the system upon detection of accident release of the suspension device from the gripper. Furthermore, the plan management system taught in further view of Coffin is already configured with a catcher assembly and a detecting means, so modifying the system such that it detects when something is in the catcher assembly and stops the system would not change or introduce new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required. The combination would have yielded the predictable result of a plant management system with a sensing device configured to detect engagement of the catcher assembly with a plant and/or suspension device, wherein the system is configured to halt the system upon detection of accident release of the suspension device from the gripper.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Coffin with a sensing device configured to detect engagement of the catcher assembly with a plant and/or suspension device, wherein the system is configured to halt the system upon detection of accident release of the suspension device from the gripper. Taught in Margaf with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because it would have yielded predictable results.
Claim(s) 14 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3714682 A1 ("Verburggen") in view of US 9646765 B2 ("Muto") in further view of US 11642797 B2 ("Chintalapalli Patta") in further view of US 2015/0173297 A1 ("Pitzer") in further view of US 10225993 B2 ("Alexander") in further view of US 2018/0343810 A1 ("Counne").
Regarding claim 14, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer does not teach comprising a weighing mechanism coupled to the robotic arm system and configured to generate load/weight data/signals indicative of a weight of a plant, or some portion thereof, coupled to the suspension device,
and a control unit configured to collect, process and/or monitor, weight data/signals of plants supported by the suspension devices thereby manipulated and issue an alert if growth anomalies are thereby determined.
Alexander, in the same field of endeavor, teaches comprising a weighing mechanism coupled to the robotic arm system and configured to generate load/weight data/signals indicative of a weight of a plant, or some portion thereof, coupled to the suspension device (Alexander: Figure 1 weight sensor 158, Column 10 lines 1-6, “In one variation, the robotic manipulator 150 further includes a weight sensor 158-such as in the form of a strain gauge integrated into a joint or into the end effector 154 configured to output a signal representing a weight or mass of a plant retrieved by the robotic manipulator 150, as described below.”),
and a control unit configured to collect, process and/or monitor, weight data/signals of plants supported by the suspension devices thereby manipulated (Alexander: Column 4 lines 15-49, “Once a plant is removed from the first module, the system 100 (e.g., the robotic manipulator) can also measure a weight of the plant to confirm that the plant passes a weight target before transferring the plant to the second module. However: if the optical scan indicates that less than a threshold proportion of plants in the first module exceed the size target, the system 100 can return the first module to a grow area in the facility for further maturation of these plants; if the optical scan indicates that more than a threshold proportion of plants in the first module fall below a quality target, the system 100 can discard plants in the first module; and if a weight measurement of a plant falls below a target weight, the system 100 can either discard the plant or transfer the plant to a third module of the same type as the first module and then return the third module to a grow area in the facility for further maturation of this and other underweight plants from the first module.”).
Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches a plant management system but does not teach a weighing mechanism coupled to the robotic arm system to weight plants coupled to the suspension device. Alexander, in the same field of endeavor, teaches weighing mechanism coupled to the robotic arm system to weight plants coupled to the suspension device. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to have combine the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with the weighing mechanism coupled to the robotic arm system to weight plants coupled to the suspension device taught in Alexander. Furthermore, the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer already discloses a detection device coupled to the robotic arm, so adding an additional detection device (the weighing mechanism in this case) or changing the detection mechanism or another would not change or introduce new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required. The combination would have yielded the predictable result with a plant management system with a weighing mechanism coupled to the robotic arm.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with the weighing mechanism coupled to the robotic arm system to weight plants coupled to the suspension device taught in Alexander with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Alexander does not teach and issue an alert if growth anomalies are thereby determined
Counne, in the same field of endeavor, teaches and issue an alert if growth anomalies are thereby determined (Counne: ¶ 0039, “Real-time quantification of plant canopy areas (and temporal changes in plant canopy areas) are used to autonomously adjust light intensity and/or photoperiod to maintain optimum light quantity throughout the growth cycle; as well as to compare growth rates with established crop models (i.e. historical data) to gauge plant health and vigor. Early detection of plant stress (and elimination/alleviation of it) is fundamental to the consistent production of high value crops. Early detection of plant stress (and elimination/alleviation of it) is fundamental to the consistent production of high value crops. Therefore, in addition to autonomously modifying environmental conditions (e.g. light intensity, photoperiod, air speed, air temperature, water temperature, humidity) upon detection and identification of a plant/crop abnormality, the system also transmits and logs an alert to operators. Each of these systems will greatly reduce or eliminate certain labor costs such as monitoring the plants for disease and care purpose.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with the method of issuing an alert if growth anomalies are detected taught in Alexander with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because automating the ability to monitor plant health using the robotic system further reduces the need and cost of labor (Counne: ¶ 0039, “Each of these systems will greatly reduce or eliminate certain labor costs such as monitoring the plants for disease and care purpose.”).
Regarding claim 18, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Alexander in further view of Counne teaches wherein the control unit is configured to manipulate the suspension device whenever the load/weight data/signals from the weighing mechanism is indicative of a plant's weight over the robotic arm (Verburggen: ¶ 0077, “To relocate a high-wire hook 102, the robot arm 602 approaches the hook 102 with the gripping device 601, which corresponds to the illustration in Fig. 4. The supported loop 107 is detected by the detection means 608 for inserting therein the protuberance 404.” Alexander: Column 4 lines 15-49, “Once a plant is removed from the first module, the system 100 (e.g., the robotic manipulator) can also measure a weight of the plant to confirm that the plant passes a weight target before transferring the plant to the second module. However: if the optical scan indicates that less than a threshold proportion of plants in the first module exceed the size target, the system 100 can return the first module to a grow area in the facility for further maturation of these plants; if the optical scan indicates that more than a threshold proportion of plants in the first module fall below a quality target, the system 100 can discard plants in the first module; and if a weight measurement of a plant falls below a target weight, the system 100 can either discard the plant or transfer the plant to a third module of the same type as the first module and then return the third module to a grow area in the facility for further maturation of this and other underweight plants from the first module.”).
Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches manipulating the suspension device based on a detection result from the detecting device. Alexander teaches determining the weight of the plant and controlling the robot based on this weight. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to have combine the method of manipulating the suspension device based on a detection result taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with determining the weight of the plant and controlling the robot based on this weight taught in Alexander. Furthermore, changing what detection result is used to manipulate the suspension device would not change or introduce new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, that the combination of Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Alexander in further view of Counne teaches the control unit is configured to manipulate the suspension device whenever the load/weight data/signals from the weighing mechanism is indicative of a plant's weight over the robotic arm.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3714682 A1 ("Verburggen") in view of US 9646765 B2 ("Muto") in further view of US 11642797 B2 ("Chintalapalli Patta") in further view of US 2015/0173297 A1 ("Pitzer") in further view of US 7546985 B1 ("Choi").
Regarding claim 19, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer does not teach comprising an auxiliary arm coupled to the at least one robotic arm,
said auxiliary arm configured to contact the cable and at least partially support the at least one robotic arm over the cable.
Choi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches an auxiliary arm coupled to the at least one robotic arm (Choi: Figure 1, Column 1 line 53 – Column 2 line 6, “To achieve these objects and other advantages and in accordance with the purpose of the invention, as embodied and broadly described herein, a cable guide device for an industrial robot to prevent a plurality of cables and a cable tube enveloping the cables between an arm and a head of the industrial robot from being twisted or bent or damaged due to contact with an outer surface of the arm during operation of the robot, comprises: a tube ring coupled to an end portion of the cable tube of the industrial robot; a cable distributor insertedly coupled in the tube ring, the cable distributor having a plurality of cable inserting holes through which the cables introduced into the cable tube of the industrial robot pass; a tube clamp rotatably fitted around an outer peripheral surface of the tube ring, the tube clamp having a ring shape; a head coupling unit coupled to a portion of the tube clamp; and a clamp supporting unit having a first end portion fitted around the outer surface of the arm of the industrial robot and a second end portion coupled to the head coupling unit, the clamp supporting unit keeping the cable tube of the industrial robot at a predetermined distance away from the outer surface of the arm.”),
said auxiliary arm configured to contact the cable and at least partially support the at least one robotic arm over the cable (Choi: Figure 1, Column 1 line 53 – Column 2 line 6, Column 2 lines 64-67, “The tube ring 100 is a member having a ring shape, an inner peripheral surface of which is rotatably coupled to an outer peripheral surface of the cable tube 50 of the industrial robot 10.”, Column 4 lines 14-17, “The clamp supporting unit 500 is mounted in such a way that one end portion is fitted around the outer surface of the arm 20 of the industrial robot 10 and the other end portion is coupled to the head coupling unit 400.”. It is clear from the cited passages that the auxiliary arm is configured to support the robotic arm and contacts the cable. ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with the comprising an auxiliary arm coupled to the at least one robotic arm, said auxiliary arm configured to contact the cable and at least partially support the at least one robotic arm over the cable taught in Choi with a reasonable expectation of success. One or ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because such a method protects the cables from damage and prevents said cables from interfering with the operation of the robot (Choi: Column 1 lines 6-34, “Generally, an industrial robot includes an arm which relatively rotates, and a head which is mounted to a front end of the arm to hold various tools. In order to transmit or receive power and a control signal to/from the head, a plurality of cables, such as a power cable, a manipulation cable, a water cable and the like, are arranged along the outer surface of the arm.”, “Such cables necessary for operation of the industrial robot may obstruct the operation of the robot. To solve this problem, the plurality of cables are enveloped in a cable tube between the arm and the head, and the cable tube is arranged so as not to obstruct the operation within a radius of operation of the industrial robot, and then is connected to a system mounted behind the industrial robot.”, “However, when the head operates, the cable tube shakes and collides with the outer surface of the arm. Thus, the cables in the cable tube suffer damage.”, “Describing in detail, when the head operates, the conventional cable tube for an industrial robot suffers friction-induced damage due to contact with the outer surface of the arm and bending due to twist. The friction-induced damage and the bending occurring successively by the operation of the robot arm cause damage to the cables enveloped in the cable tube.”).
Claim(s) 20 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3714682 A1 ("Verburggen") in view of US 9646765 B2 ("Muto") in further view of US 11642797 B2 ("Chintalapalli Patta") in further view of US 2015/0173297 A1 ("Pitzer") in further view of US 7546985 B1 ("Choi") in further view of JP H05177580 A ("Yasumoto").
Regrading claim 20, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Choi does not teach wherein the auxiliary arm is hinged to the at least one robotic arm.
Yasumoto, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the auxiliary arm is hinged to the at least one robotic arm (Yasumoto: ¶ 0010, “The welding robot 9 comprises a robot body 9a, a main arm 9b hinged to the robot body 9a, an inverted L-shaped auxiliary arm 9c hinged to the main arm 9b, and a torch 9d attached to the tip of the auxiliary arm 9c so as to be rotatable about the axis of the auxiliary arm 9c.”. The cited passage clearly teaches an auxiliary arm being hinged to the main arm.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combined the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Choi with the auxiliary arm being hinged to the robotic arm taught in Yasumoto with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because it is a substitution of a known component with another. The auxiliary arm taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Choi is fixed to the robotic arm through friction and a clamping force, whereas in Yasumoto the auxiliary arm is fixed to the robotic arm with a hinge. Both of these types of connections are known to those of ordinary skill in the art and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to change one connection for the other. Furthermore, changing one connection method for another would not change or introduce new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required.
Regarding claim 21, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer in further view of Choi in further view of Yasumoto teaches wherein the auxiliary arm is coupled to the at least one robotic arm by an elastic element configured to pull the auxiliary arm towards the at least one robotic arm (Choi: Figure 2 and 7a, “Describing in detail, the clamp supporting unit 500 includes a clamp support ring 510 which is fitted around the outer surface of the arm 20 of the industrial robot 10, and a spring shaft 520, one end portion of which is coupled to the clamp support ring 510 and the other end portion of which is coupled to the head coupling unit 400.”).
Claim(s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3714682 A1 ("Verburggen") in view of US 9646765 B2 ("Muto") in further view of US 11642797 B2 ("Chintalapalli Patta") in further view of US 2015/0173297 A1 ("Pitzer") in further view of US 4593515 ("Margaf").
Regarding claim 36, Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer does not teach comprising detecting accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or halting operations responsive to the detection of accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or issuing an alert.
Margaf, in the same field of endeavor, teaches detecting accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or halting operations responsive to the detection of accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or issuing an alert (Margaf: Column 5 lines 4-22, “The dropped article sensing means catches articles dropped from the conveyor path and generates a wrapping machine stop signal or interrupt in response to a dropped article whereby the dropped article must be retrieved before restarting the wrapping machine and the dropped article may be salvaged.”).
Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer teaches a plant management system but does not teach a method of detecting accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or halting operations responsive to the detection of accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or issuing an alert. Margaf teaches a method of detecting accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or halting operations responsive to the detection of accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or issuing an alert. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technological capabilities required to have modified the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with the method of detecting accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or halting operations responsive to the detection of accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or issuing an alert taught in Margaf. Furthermore, the plant management system taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer is already configured with a detection device at the end effector of the robotic arm, so modifying such that it can detect accidental release of the suspension device would not change or introduce new functionality. No inventive effort would be required. The combination would have yielded the predictable result of a plant management system with a method of detecting accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or halting operations responsive to the detection of accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or issuing an alert.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have combine the plant management device taught in Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta in further view of Pitzer with the method of detecting accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or halting operations responsive to the detection of accidental release of the suspension device from the manipulator, and/or issuing an alert taught in Margaf with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, specifically that the combination of Verburggen in view of Muto in further view of Chintalapalli Patta does not teach the limitation “and at least one sensing unit mounted to said rigid beam posterior to said gripper along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device”, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed February 24th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s Arguments on Pages 9-14, Applicant argues that the prior art on record fails to teach the limitations of the amended independent claim 1.
Specifically on Page 11, Applicant argues that there is no teaching suggestion or motivation to combine Verburggen in view of Muto. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Verburggen in view of Muto because the combination would have required the simple substitution of one known method of actuation for another Verburggen already teaches an elevator mechanism and a robotic arm that moves in a direction perpendicular to the direction of elevation towards a hook hung from a wire. The only modification required is to modify the system taught in Verburggen with the a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm. As such, there exists a teaching, suggest, or motivation to combine Verburggen in view of Muto.
Specifically on Page 11, Applicant argues that Muto is not analogous prior art. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that Muto is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Muto is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was particularly concerned. Muto teaches a robotic arm comprising a series of rigid links, wherein these rigid links are linearly actuated. Said rigid link on which the end effector is disposed is linearly actuated in the Z direction (i.e. the direction parallel to the direction of gravity) and is also linearly actuated in the X and Y directions, which are the directions parallel to the ground and perpendicular to the direction of gravity. This is clearly pertinent to the structure of the robot claimed in the limitation “at least one robotic arm comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that: (i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces”. As such Muto is clearly analogous prior art.
Specifically on Pages 11-12, Applicant argues that the combination of Verburggen in view of Muto does not teach the limitation “at least one robotic arm comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that: (i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As was stated above in the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection section, the primary reference Verburggen teaches a plants management and/or treatment system comprising (Verburggen: Figure 6, Abstract): at least one robotic arm (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074) configured to move said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device (Verburggen: Figure 3, ¶ 0072); a gripper positioned at an extremity of said at least one robotic arm (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074), wherein said gripper: (a) is coupled to a rotating-actuator for controllably rotating the gripper about an axis substantially parallel to, or coinciding with, said longitudinal axis (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074, ¶ 0079); and (b) is configured to grip said suspension device between gripping members thereof and manipulate it to adjust of suspension height, and/or location of said suspension device along said cable (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074, ¶ 0076, ¶ 0077, ¶ 0078, ¶ 0079, ¶ 0080), and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members (Verburggen: Figure 4 third support member 405, ¶ 0077, ¶ 0078); and at least one sensing unit mounted to said at least on robot arm along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to enable (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074, ¶ 0077), said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0051, ¶ 0052, ¶ 0053, ¶ 0074, ¶ 0077), and generate signals/data indicative of the detected location to cause said at least one robotic arm to reciprocally move along said longitudinal axis and manipulate said suspension device (Verburggen: ¶ 0051, ¶ 0052, ¶ 0053, ¶ 0077). Verburggen teaches a robot system configured to grip a hook hung from a wire which supports a plant. The system is configured to rotate and translate said hook. The system is configured to detect the special location of the hook with a sensor mounted on the robot. The gripping mechanism mounted on the distal end of the robot arm is configured with gripping members that are configured to move together in order to clamp the hook. The system is further configured with an elevator mechanism to raise and lower the robot arm. The secondary reference Muto teaches comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of elevation of said elevator actuator (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 57-67), wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 49-56, Column 7 lines 57-67), and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 57-67). Muto teaches a robotic arm comprising a series of linearly actuated rigid links, wherein an end effector disposed at the distal end of the final rigid link. Said final rigid link is linearly actuated in the Z direction (i.e. the direction parallel to the direction of gravity) and is additionally actuated in the X and Y directions (i.e. the directions parallel to the ground and perpendicular to the direction of gravity). Furthermore, the longitudinal axis of the final link is in the Y direction. As such Muto clearly teaches a robot arm wherein the gravitational force applied to the end effector by an object would be transverse to the longitudinal direction. This is shown by the fact that the longitudinal axis of the final link is parallel to the Y direction which is perpendicular to the Z direction. As the final link is linearly actuated along the Y direction, this clearly teaches that the linear actuation is perpendicular to the force of gravity. Additionally, Applicant argues that Verburggen in view of Muto does not teach the limitation in question because Verburggen and Muto do not actively recite considerations od power demand and gravitational forces. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitation in question, power demand is not claimed in the limitation in question or in any previous or subsequent limitations. Furthermore, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the gravitational considerations are not an active control step or an active consideration by the system, and are merely a result of the physical structure of the system. As such, a system with substantially similar structure would teach the limitation in question, which Muto has been shown to. Therefore, for the reasons stated herein, Verburggen in view of Muto teaches the limitation “at least one robotic arm comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device, wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that: (i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis, and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces”.
Specifically on Page 12, Applicant argues that Verburggen does not teach the limitation “said gripper: (a) coupled to a rotating-actuator for controllably rotating the gripper about an axis substantially parallel to, or coinciding with, said longitudinal axis”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As is stated in the discussion of Applicant’s previous arguments and above in the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection section, Verburggen teaches a plant management robot comprising a robot arm mounted on an elevator, wherein the robot arm has a gripping mechanism coupled to the distal end of the robot arm. The gripping mechanism is configured to grip and rotate/translate a hook hung from a wire. The system achieves this by rotating the distal end of the robot arm that the gripping mechanism is mounted to. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that because the distal end of the robot is being rotated, the direction of rotation would coincide with the longitudinal axis of the robot. This can be seen in Figure 6 of Verburggen which shows the full system and in Paragraph 0074 and 0079 which describe the structure of the robot and how the distal end is rotated respectively. Therefore, Verburggen teaches the limitation “said gripper: (a) coupled to a rotating-actuator for controllably rotating the gripper about an axis substantially parallel to, or coinciding with, said longitudinal axis”
Specifically on Pages 12-13, Applicant argues that the secondary reference Chintalapalli Patta does not teach the limitation “at least one of said gripping members comprising friction imparting means formed on gripping surfaces configured to contact a body portion of the suspension device, and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another one of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members by friction force”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As was stated in the previous Final Office Action mailed December 2nd, 2025, and above in the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection section, the primary reference Verburggen teaches a plants management and/or treatment system comprising (Verburggen: Figure 6, Abstract): at least one robotic arm (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074) configured to move said at least one robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device placed on a cable to manipulate at least one plant coupled to said suspension device (Verburggen: Figure 3, ¶ 0072); a gripper positioned at an extremity of said at least one robotic arm (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074), wherein said gripper: (a) is coupled to a rotating-actuator for controllably rotating the gripper about an axis substantially parallel to, or coinciding with, said longitudinal axis (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074, ¶ 0079); and (b) is configured to grip said suspension device between gripping members thereof and manipulate it to adjust of suspension height, and/or location of said suspension device along said cable (Verburggen: Figures 4 and 6, ¶ 0074, ¶ 0076, ¶ 0077, ¶ 0078, ¶ 0079, ¶ 0080), and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members (Verburggen: Figure 4 third support member 405, ¶ 0077, ¶ 0078); and at least one sensing unit mounted to said at least on robot arm along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to enable (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0074, ¶ 0077), said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location (Verburggen: Figure 6, ¶ 0051, ¶ 0052, ¶ 0053, ¶ 0074, ¶ 0077), and generate signals/data indicative of the detected location to cause said at least one robotic arm to reciprocally move along said longitudinal axis and manipulate said suspension device (Verburggen: ¶ 0051, ¶ 0052, ¶ 0053, ¶ 0077). Verburggen teaches a robot system configured to grip a hook hung from a wire which supports a plant. The system is configured to rotate and translate said hook. The system is configured to detect the special location of the hook with a sensor mounted on the robot. The gripping mechanism mounted on the distal end of the robot arm is configured with gripping members that are configured to move together in order to clamp the hook. The system is further configured with an elevator mechanism to raise and lower the robot arm. The secondary reference Muto teaches comprising a rigid beam configured to reciprocally move by linear actuation along a longitudinal axis of said robotic arm towards or away from a suspension device in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of elevation of said elevator actuator (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 57-67), wherein said at least one robotic arm is dimensioned and arranged such that:(i) gravitational force applied by said at least one plant on said at least one robotic arm acts substantially transverse to said longitudinal axis (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 49-56, Column 7 lines 57-67), and (ii) said linear actuation acts in a direction substantially perpendicular to gravitational forces applied by said at least one plant, such that said linear actuation is not required to overcome said gravitational forces (Muto: Figure 1 expanding/contracting actuators 96 and 97, Column 7 lines 57-67). The secondary reference Chintalapalli Patta teaches at least one of said gripping fingers comprising friction imparting means formed on gripping surfaces configured to contact a body portion of the suspension device (Chintalapalli Patta: Figure 4 friction pad 406, Column 6 line 59 – Column 7 line 7). and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members by friction force (Chintalapalli Patta: Figure 4 friction pad 406, Column 6 line 59 – Column 7 line 7). As can clearly be seen, the fingers of the end effector of Chintalapalli Patta teaches friction imparting means that apply a friction force when an object is gripped by an end effector. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been easily able to modify the gripping members of the end effector taught in Verburggen in view of Muto to include the friction imparting means taught in Chintalapalli Patta. Such a modification would have required the simple addition of known components. As such, such a modification would not have changed or introduced new functionality. No inventive effort would have been required. Additionally, the end effector taught in Verburggen in view of Muto already teaches gripping members that are configured to move towards one another and squeeze the suspension device. Therefore, the combination of Verburggen in view of Muto inf further view of Chintalapalli Patta teaches the limitation “at least one of said gripping members comprising friction imparting means formed on gripping surfaces configured to contact a body portion of the suspension device, and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another one of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members by friction force”.
Specifically on Page 13, Applicant argues that Chintalapalli Patta is not analogous prior art. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that Chintalapalli Patta is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, In this case, Chintalapalli Patta is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was particularly concerned. Chintalapalli Patta teaches friction imparting means disposed on the fingers of an end effector, which are configured to impart a friction force on a gripped object. This is clearly pertinent to the structure of the robot claimed in the limitation “at least one of said gripping members comprising friction imparting means formed on gripping surfaces configured to contact a body portion of the suspension device, and at least one of said gripping members configured to move towards another one of said gripping members for squeezing and immobilizing the suspension device between said gripping members by friction force”. As such Chintalapalli Patta is clearly analogous prior art.
Specifically on Pages 13-15, applicant argues that Verburggen does the limitation “at least one sensing unit mounted to said rigid beam posterior to said gripper along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to thereby enable said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location, and to generate signals/data indicative of the detected location to cause said at least one robotic arm to reciprocally move along said longitudinal axis and manipulate said suspension device”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As is stated in the discussion of Applicant’s previous arguments and above in the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection section, Verburggen teaches a plant management robot comprising a robot arm mounted on an elevator, wherein the robot arm has a gripping mechanism coupled to the distal end of the robot arm. The gripping mechanism is configured to grip and rotate/translate a hook hung from a wire. The robot arm is further configured with a sensor configured to determine the special location of the hook and provides the controller with said detected location. The robot arm is then actuated based on this detection position. Such a process is described in Paragraphs 0051-0053, 0074, and 0077 of Verburggen. This clearly shows that the robot is controlled based on the position of the hook both before and after the gripper has gripped the hook. As such, Verburggen clearly teaches the limitation “at least one sensing unit mounted to said rigid beam posterior to said gripper along said longitudinal axis and configured to reciprocally move therewith along said longitudinal axis towards or away from said suspension device to thereby enable said at least one sensing unit to continuously and uninterruptedly detect location of said suspension device on said cable while carrying out said reciprocal movements before said gripper reaches said location, and to generate signals/data indicative of the detected location to cause said at least one robotic arm to reciprocally move along said longitudinal axis and manipulate said suspension device”.
Therefore, for the reasons stated herein and above in the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection section, the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of independent claims 1 and 31 are maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Noah W Stiebritz whose telephone number is (571)272-3414. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 7-5 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, 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.
/N.W.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3658
/Ramon A. Mercado/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3658