DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1, and thus its dependent claims, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Line 12 of claim 1 recites the term “an oscillating shaft” – however nowhere in Applicant’s Specification and/or Drawings is an “oscillating shaft” described. The only oscillating component described in Applicant’s Specification and/or Drawings is described as the “oscillating piece 50”. Therefore, it is unclear if the term “an oscillating shaft” is a separate structural component of the “oscillating piece 50” or if the oscillating shaft and oscillating piece are meant to describe the same component.
Claim 1, and thus its dependent claims, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, line 12 of claim 1 recites the term “an oscillating shaft” – however nowhere in Applicant’s Specification and/or Drawings is an “oscillating shaft” described. The only oscillating component described in Applicant’s Specification and/or Drawings is described as the “oscillating piece 50”. Therefore, it is unclear if the term “an oscillating shaft” is a separate structural component of the “oscillating piece 50” or if the oscillating shaft and oscillating piece are meant to describe the same component. For the purpose of examination, the Examiner has taken this limitation to mean the oscillating piece is an oscillating shaft.
Additionally, line 13 of claim 1 recites the limitation of “the oscillating piece oscillates is collinear with a rotation shaft of the rope winding shaft”, however it is unclear from Applicant’s specification and/or drawings how the oscillating piece 50 and its rotational shaft is collinear with the rope winding shaft 30, as Figure 4 shows the two components in more of a perpendicular relationship with one another, therefore it is unclear how they are collinear.
Furthermore, lines 16-20 of claim 1 recite the limitation(s) of “and the rope is further fixed to one end of the oscillating piece around a circumference that the oscillating piece oscillates; after one end of the other rope is fixed, it is partially wound in a portion of the groove near the rope winding spiral groove, and the rope is fixed to the other end of the oscillating piece around the circumference that the oscillating piece oscillates”, however it is unclear from Applicant’s specification and/or drawings how the end of the rope 40 is fixed to one end of the oscillating piece around a circumference of the oscillating piece. The only Figures that show the rope 40 are Figures 2-3, with neither Figure showing a coordinating relationship between the rope 40 and the oscillating piece 50. Figure 5 shows the oscillating piece 50 and the rope winding shaft 30 connected, however again is void any description of how the ends of the rope 40 are joined with the oscillating piece 50. For the purpose of examination, the Examiner has taken this limitation to mean that a rope/cable of the transmission assembly, of which is wound around the winding shaft, is either directly or indirectly in a connected relationship with the oscillating piece.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilkinson et al. (US 2020/0179212 A1) in view of Zhang (CN 109620637 A).
Regarding claim 1, Wilkinson discloses a rope transmission device (a cable transmission assembly connects the motor that actuates joint J3 to the output of joint J3, Paragraphs 0126, 0141-0142 and Figure 6) for driving a limb fixing assembly (cable transmission assembly drives movement of robotic links 105, 110 and patient coupling element 115, Paragraphs 0155 and 0162 and Figures 1-4), the rope transmission device comprising: a device main body (base 502, Paragraph 0141 and Figure 6; the examiner notes this base 502 is consistent with what Applicant describes as the main body 10 in Figure 1); a transmission assembly (cable transmission assembly as described in Paragraphs 0141-0142 and Figure 6), wherein the transmission assembly is provided to the device main body (see cable transmission assembly provided to base 502, Figure 6); a rope winding shaft (shaft 570, Figure 6 and Paragraph 0142), wherein the rope winding shaft is rotatably connected to the transmission assembly (shaft 570 rotatably connected to the remainder of the transmission assembly such as pulley 540, Figure 6 and Paragraph 0142), the rope winding shaft having an inner end proximal to the transmission assembly and an outer end remote from the transmission assembly (see shaft 570 having one end extending towards the remainder of the transmission assembly such as the pulley 540, and another end extending the opposite direction, Figure 6); an oscillating piece for driving the limb fixing assembly (inner link 105 oscillates as shown in Figure 4, therefore driving the limb coupling element 115), wherein the oscillating piece is provided on the device main body (inner link 105 provided on base 502, Figure 6) in such a way that an oscillating shaft around which the oscillating piece oscillates is collinear with a rotation shaft of the rope winding shaft (the Examiner notes the 112b rejection presented above for this particular limitation; therefore, as this particular limitation is unclear, it is unable to be examined and therefore this portion of the claim is being interpreted as if the limitation was not present); and two ropes (cables 576, 577, Paragraph 0142 and Figure 6), wherein one end of one of the ropes is fixed to the rope winding shaft (see ends of cables 576 and 577 fixed to shaft 570, Figure 6), and the rope is further fixed to one end of the oscillating piece around a circumference that the oscillating piece oscillates; after one end of the other rope is fixed, it is partially wound in a portion of the groove near the rope winding spiral groove, and the rope is fixed to the other end of the oscillating piece around the circumference that the oscillating piece oscillates (the Examiner notes the 112b rejection presented above for this particular limitation(s); For the purpose of Examination, the examiner has taken this limitation to mean that a rope/cable of the transmission assembly, of which is wound around the winding shaft, is either directly or indirectly in a connected relationship with the oscillating piece – therefore, as Wilkinson’s cables 576 and 577 are in a connective relationship between the rope winding shaft 570 and the oscillating link 105, as shown in Figure 6, the examiner considers this limitation to be met by the prior art).
However, although Wilkinson teaches a rope/cable winding shaft (Figure 6), Wilkinson doesn’t explicitly state and at least one continuous rope winding spiral groove is provided along a peripheral edge of an outer wall of the rope winding shaft, wherein the rope is partially wound in a portion of a groove near the inner end of the rope winding spiral groove of the rope winding shaft.
However, Zhang teaches a device for driving a limb of a user (Abstract and Figure 1) comprising a transmission assembly comprising a rope winding shaft (drive unit 17 comprises a pulley shaft 27, Page 5, second paragraph and Figure 4) such that the shaft comprises at least one continuous rope winding spiral groove along its peripheral edge of an outer wall of the shaft, such that the rope is partially wound in a portion of the groove (pulley shaft 27 is provided with pulley grooves for each associated cable 15 and 12, Page 5, second paragraph and Figure 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Wilkinson’s device such that the rope winding shaft comprises corresponding grooves to accommodate the cable/ropes, as taught by Zhang, as providing corresponding grooves on a rope/cable winding shaft of a transmission assembly is an art recognized means of securing the cables/ropes to the shaft, and therefore may provide a more secure attachment of the cables/ropes to the corresponding shaft.
Regarding claim 2, Zhang further teaches wherein distances between two adjacent groove bodies of the rope winding spiral groove are equal (see grooves on pulley shaft 27 equally spaced apart, Figure 4).
Regarding claim 3, Wilkinson further teaches wherein the transmission assembly is embodied as a motor (the cable transmission assembly comprises two motors 500 affixed to the base 502, Paragraph 0141 and Figure 6), and the rope winding shaft is embodied as an output shaft of the motor (shaft 570 is a motor pinion, Paragraph 0142).
Regarding claim 9, Wilkinson further teaches rehabilitation exercise equipment, wherein the rehabilitation exercise equipment comprises: the rope transmission device according to claim 1; and a limb fixing assembly, wherein the limb fixing assembly is connected to the oscillating piece of the rope transmission device (Wilkinson’s device fully capable to be used as rehabilitation exercise equipment, see Claim 1 analysis above).
Regarding claim 10, Wilkinson further teaches wherein the rehabilitation exercise equipment comprises at least two rope transmission devices (see at least two rope transmission devices/shafts as shown in Figure 6) and at least two link mechanisms (see at least two linking/pulley mechanisms as shown in Figure 6 and described in Paragraph 0142), and rotation axes that the rope winding shafts in the two rope transmission devices rotate around are perpendicular to each other (see rotational axis J2 of shaft 570 perpendicular with rotational axis J1 of shaft 505, Figure 6); the limb fixing assembly is fixed to the oscillating piece of one of the rope transmission devices by one link mechanism (link member 105 fixed to limb coupling element 115, Figures 1-5), and the limb fixing assembly is fixed to the oscillating piece of the other rope transmission device by the other link mechanism (see Figure 2 showing limb coupling element 114 fixed to link member 104 through additional link 110).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Although Wilkinson discloses an oscillating piece with a circular outer wall portion (Figures 1-4), Wilkinson is silent such that
the oscillating piece has a circular arc outer wall portion and at least one radial connecting portion connected to the circular arc outer wall portion, the radial connecting portion being provided to be rotatably mounted to the device main body about the oscillating axis, wherein each of the ropes is respectively connected to one rope tightener in a way that can be tightened in a tangential direction tangential to the circular arc outer wall portion; wherein the rope tighteners are mounted to two ends of the oscillating piece; wherein the rope tightener comprises a base, a moving block, and a tightness adjusting piece, the base being fixed to one end of the circular arc outer wall portion of the oscillating piece, and the base being provided with a perforation extending in a tangential direction tangential to the outer wall of the circular arc outer wall portion, wherein the moving block can be slidingly connected to the base in a direction in which the perforation extends, and the moving block is connected to the tightness adjusting piece in a way that can be driven. Therefore, a radical structural modification of Wilkinson’s device would be required to arrive at the structure as claimed in claims 4-8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ho (US 2021/0068988 A1) and Krell (US 2010/0144504 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH B LEDERER whose telephone number is 571-272-7274. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 7:30 AM - 4:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brandy Lee can be reached on (571)-270-7410. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SARAH B LEDERER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/MARGARET M LUARCA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785