DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the RCE and Amendment dated 09 February 2026. Claims 1, 9 and 15 are amended. No claims have been added or cancelled. Claims 1-20 remain pending and have been considered 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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
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.
Claims 1, 9 and 15 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. Independent claims 1, 9 and 15 recite “check if the tool is correct”. It is unclear what makes the tool correct or incorrect and it is unclear how the check is performed, therefore, it is indefinite. Moreover, this claim limitation lacks a resulting action of the conditional check and any result of this conditional check is not integrated into any other claim limitation in the independent claims (e.g. if the tool is correct perform x, if the tool is incorrect perform y). Dependent claims 2-8, 10-14 and 16-20 are rejected for incorporating the deficiencies of their respective base independent claims.
Claims 1, 9 and 15 recite the limitation “the offset”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Dependent claims 2-8, 10-14 and 16-20 are rejected for incorporating the deficiencies of their respective base independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (US 2023/0150075 A1) in view of Matl et al. (US 2022/0048707 A1) and further in view of Tao et al. (US 6,243,621 B1).
As for independent claim 1, Wu teaches a method comprising:
determining, using a computing, an assembly operation of a hardware device having a workpiece that includes the workpiece being positionable on a workstation in proximity to proximity sensors [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0102, 0123) ”second controller 250, an operating table 210, and a robot media handler 220. The operating table 210 is configured to fasten the server. The operating table 210 may limit and lock the server, so that the robot media handler 220 performs an assembling operation on the server, to prevent the server from being displaced in an assembling process to affect accuracy … The positioning component 225 is connected to the second controller 250. The second controller 250 may determine, based on the positioning component 225, a position of a part to be gripped by the robot media handler and a position at which the gripped part is to be placed, to ensure positioning accuracy of the robot media handler. In a specific embodiment, the positioning component 225 may be a visual component. The visual component is connected to the second controller 250. The visual component scans a position at which the robot media handler 220 is to perform an operation, and extracts a feature of a scanned area; and compares the feature of the scanned area with a feature of a target position to determine coordinates of the position at which the robot media handler 220 is to perform the operation, and then feeds back the coordinates to the second controller 250, to accurately adjust a posture of the robot media handler 220, thereby improving action accuracy of the execution apparatus 200. The feature of the target position may be set in advance and stored in the visual component. The visual component may be any type of device that can complete object recognition, such as a sensor (such as a radar) or a camera”].
obtaining the workpiece [(e.g. see Wu paragraph 0156) ”The second controller 250 controls the operating table 210 of the execution apparatus 200 to fasten and clamp the server. Specifically, the server may be manually transported to the operating table 210, or the server may be transported to the operating table 210 by using a robot”].
determining which parts and specification data to retrieve and access based on an order for the hardware device [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0097, 0122) ”obtain a maintenance task that is in maintenance work and that is sent by the operation and maintenance system 001, and parse the maintenance task sent by the operation and maintenance system into one or more control instructions. The management apparatus 300 is communicatively connected to the material apparatus 100 and the execution apparatus 200, and transmits the control instructions to the material apparatus and the execution apparatus. The maintenance task includes an operation type and an operation object. For example, the operation type specifically includes part installation, part replacement, or part removal, and the operation object specifically includes a number of a to-be-adjusted device, a model of a to-be-removed part, or a model of a to-be-assembled part. For example, the maintenance task indicates to add a 32G memory module to a server, remove a hard disk 1 in a device A … information about a current part is obtained by using the recognizer 230 and is compared with required information, so that it can be ensured that a part that is being processed by the execution apparatus 200 matches a work order task, to improve reliability and operation accuracy of the execution apparatus 200”].
assessing, using the computer, workstation inventory data [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0153) ”codes of memory modules of various models and information about positions of the memory modules in the shelf 110 are all stored in the database”].
determining which parts to pull based on the order [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0097, 0122, 0153) ”the maintenance task indicates to add a 32G memory module to a server … information about a current part is obtained by using the recognizer 230 and is compared with required information, so that it can be ensured that a part that is being processed by the execution apparatus 200 matches a work order task, to improve reliability and operation accuracy of the execution apparatus 200 … After receiving the first control instruction, the first controller 180 may read the slot of the memory module that needs to be used in the shelf 110 and the code of the memory module from the database”].
interpreting, using the computer, a readable label on a part or the workpiece [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0103, 0122) ”The system configuration module 350 is configured to configure and manage a BOM and barcode information of a server part, such as a CPU, a hard disk, or a memory, in the database 330 … The recognizer 230 may be configured to scan an identifier of a to-be-assembled part and/or an identifier of a removed part, to determine whether the current scanned part matches a part recorded by the management apparatus 300, thereby improving accuracy of the device assembling system, and preventing an error in an assembled part or a removed part of a server. The identifier includes content, such as a picture or a barcode, used to identify attribute information, such as a type and a specification, of the part. The recognizer 230 is a device that can use a barcode scanner, a two-dimensional code scanner, a camera, or the like to identify attributes (such as a type and a specification) of a part by using an identifier (such as a barcode) of the part”].
checking the alignment of the workpiece [(e.g. see Wu paragraph 0123) ”each robot media handler further includes a positioning component 225. The positioning component 225 is connected to the second controller 250. The second controller 250 may determine, based on the positioning component 225, a position of a part to be gripped by the robot media handler and a position at which the gripped part is to be placed, to ensure positioning accuracy of the robot media handler. In a specific embodiment, the positioning component 225 may be a visual component. The visual component is connected to the second controller 250. The visual component scans a position at which the robot media handler 220 is to perform an operation, and extracts a feature of a scanned area; and compares the feature of the scanned area with a feature of a target position to determine coordinates of the position at which the robot media handler 220 is to perform the operation, and then feeds back the coordinates to the second controller 250, to accurately adjust a posture of the robot media handler 220, thereby improving action accuracy of the execution apparatus 200. The feature of the target position may be set in advance and stored in the visual component. The visual component may be any type of device that can complete object recognition, such as a sensor (such as a radar) or a camera”].
checking if the tool is correct [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0120, 0150, 0159) ”The robot arm is connected to a tool handler component. The tool handler component includes a base and tool handlers installed on the base. The base has a second drive structure, and the second drive structure can drive the base to rotate or move relative to the robot arm. Therefore, the base can move or rotate based on control of the second controller, so that a required target tool handler is located at a working position … example in which a device assembling system replaces a memory module of a server … The second controller 250 controls the first robot media handler 223 to replace the air director tool handler with a memory module tool handler”].
determining, using the computer, and sending an operational instruction to the tool communicatable with the workpiece to dynamically pick and install or uninstall a determined part on a location of the workpiece [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0165, 0168) ”controls the second robot media handler 224 to grip the memory module that is on the material tray 150 and that needs to be used: The second robot media handler 224 moves to the material table 120, and determines coordinates of a memory module slot in the material tray 150 through positioning by using the positioning component 225, and a first gripper 2224 of the second robot media handler 224 grips the to-be-installed memory module (the 32G memory module) from the material tray 150 … The second controller 250 controls the second robot media handler 224 to install the to-be-installed memory module to the server: After determining that a code of the memory module matches a code of the to-be-assembled part in the control instruction, the second controller 250 controls the second robot media handler 224 to move to an area that is in the server and in which the memory module needs to be installed; and determines, through positioning by using the positioning component 225, the coordinates of the card slot in which the memory module is to be replaced, and then inserts the memory module”].
Wu does not specifically teach determining which parts to pull based on the order and a physical workstation inventory. However, in the same field of invention, Matl teaches:
determining which parts to pull based on the order and a physical workstation inventory [(e.g. see Matl paragraphs 0021, 0040, 0055, 0129, 0161, 0189) ”comprises a robotic pick-and-place machine 111 and a set of item bins 112, the set of item bins 112 being within a reachable range of the robotic pick-and-place system 111 … Each robotic workcell preferably includes a plurality of item bins 112 such that each robotic workcell may be used in packing two or more different types of items. The number of item bins may be adjusted based on the type and size of the items packed and/or the size and graspable range of the robotic pick-and-place machines 111. In one exemplary implementation, each robotic workcell 110 may have a set of item bins 112 that includes between 2-8 item bins … automated or semi-automated loading of items in bins, configured operation of robotic pick-and-place machines, and/or adapting operation in response to monitored packing, item inventory, changes in orders, and/or other factors … … The state could include the pending orders, the state of current item bins (e.g., current item bin placement and current inventory stock) … provide optionality of when to place a given item within a tote … the method enables live updates to packing order fulfillment. In some instances, the method may experience receiving updated packing orders as part of block S110, wherein packing orders are edited, canceled, and/or newly created. In response to such changes in the packing orders, the method may include reassessing the packing fulfillment plan based on the current status and then updating operation of the robotic kitting line accordingly. This variation may account for current packing orders and their associated item totes currently in process within the robotic kitting line. Available item inventory may be another source of changes to packing orders. Unexpected changes to item availability within the robotic kitting line may happen because of failed item packing (e.g., dropped items, or items not passing some validation testing), unscheduled changes to item inventory (e.g., an item bin manually pulled from the robotic kitting line), and/or other situations. The packing fulfillment plan can preferably be updated in response to changes in inventory”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Wu and Matl, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add determining which parts to pull based on the order and a physical workstation inventory, as taught by Matl, to the teachings of Wu because it allows for improved fulfillment output, efficient error recovery, and reduced or eliminated downtime during inventory updates (e.g. see Matl paragraph 0029).
Wu and Matl do not specifically teach checking the offset of the workpiece by contacting the workpiece with the tool. However, in the same field of invention, Tao teaches:
checking the offset of the workpiece by contacting the workpiece with the tool [(e.g. see Tao col 1 line 61 – col 2 line 6, col 6 lines 25-37) ”The robot arm is then moved until the sensor contacts a first target point on the workpiece to locate the first target point relative to the robot. Then the positioner is moved into a second orientation to reorient the workpiece relative to the robot. Then the robot arm moves until the sensor contacts a second target point on the workpiece to locate the second target point relative to the robot. Depending on the requirements of a particular situation, the number of target points and workpiece orientations is varied. Finally, the position of the workpiece relative to the robot is determined using the locations of the first and second points that have been previously determined … The master position information determines the programmed positions for the robot 22. Any differences between actual location information and the master information represents the offset of the workpiece away from its mastered position. As discussed above, an offset can be the result of an inaccurate placement of the workpiece 62 on a positioner 60 or manufacturing imperfections, for example. During subsequent actual search operations, the determined positional information of the workpiece is compared to the pre-recorded and stored master information. The master position and the offset information determined during the touch sensing procedure preferably are stored in memory relative to the coordinated frame 110”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Wu, Matl and Tao, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add checking the offset of the workpiece by contacting the workpiece with the tool, as taught by Tao, to the teachings of Wu and Matl because determining an offset allows for inaccurate placement or manufacturing imperfections of a workpiece to be resolved (e.g. see Tao col 6 lines 29-31).
As for dependent claim 2, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the method as described in claim 1 and Wu further teaches:
wherein the tool is a robot arm [(e.g. see Wu paragraph 0019 and Fig. 2 numeral 221) ”the robot media handler includes a robot arm and tool handlers, and the tool handlers are detachably connected to the robot arm by using quick structures”].
As for dependent claim 3, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the method as described in claim 1 and Wu further teaches:
wherein the part for dynamically picking and installing or uninstalling are memory cards [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0142, 0150) ”The operation object may include a number of a to-be-adjusted device, a model of a to-be-removed part, or a model of a to-be-assembled part. The operation type may include part installation, part removal, or part replacement. For example, if a maintenance task is replacing a 16G memory module of a server with a 32G memory module, a operation type is part replacement, a number of a to-be-adjusted device is a number of the server to facilitate determining of a specific server on which the part replacement operation is performed, a model of a to-be-removed part is the 16G memory module, and a model of a to-be-assembled part is the 32G memory module … an example in which a device assembling system replaces a memory module of a server. That is, an operation type is part replacement, and an operation object is specifically as follows: A number of a to-be-adjusted device is a server xxxxxx, a model of a to-be-removed memory module is a 16G memory module, and a model of a to-be-assembled part is a 32G memory module”].
As for dependent claim 4, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the method as described in claim 3 and Wu further teaches:
wherein the workpiece is a drawer providing a housing for the memory cards in a server application [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0132, 0153) ”can grip the protrusion 151, to hook out or push in the material tray 150 … the first controller 180 controls the transport component 130 to take out, from the slot, a material tray 150 on which the memory module is placed”].
As for dependent claim 5, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the method as described in claim 1 and Wu further teaches:
further comprising: determining a gripper head based on the label or the order; engaging the gripper head on the tool; and employing the gripper head to engage the part [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0118, 0150) ”Because the robot media handler performs different specific actions on different materials and performs different specific actions on a same material, different tool handlers need to be configured for the robot media handler for different operations of different materials. As shown in FIG. 2, the robot media handler 220 includes a robot arm 221 and tool handlers 222. Manners of disposing and replacing different tool handlers 222 in each robot media handler 200 are not specifically limited. In a possible implementation, the tool handler 222 is detachably installed to the robot arm 221. Specifically, a quick structure may be provided between the tool handler 222 and the robot arm 221 … In this embodiment, the device assembling system shown in FIG. 2 is used as an example. The execution apparatus 200 includes two robot media handlers 220: a first robot media handler 223 and a second robot media handler 224, and further includes tool handler storage racks 240 in a one-to-one correspondence with the two robot media handlers 220. The tool handler storage rack 240 is configured to store various tool handlers 222. The tool handler storage rack 240 includes a first drive structure that drives the tool handler storage rack 240 to rotate. As shown in FIG. 6, a memory module tool handler includes a first gripper 2224 and a second gripper 2225. The first gripper 2224 is configured to grip a memory module, and the second gripper 2225 is configured to open a lock for fastening the memory module”].
As for dependent claim 6, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the method as described in claim 1 and Wu further teaches:
wherein reading a label on a part or the workpiece further comprising employing a scanner to scan a bar code [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0103, 0122) ”The system configuration module 350 is configured to configure and manage a BOM and barcode information of a server part, such as a CPU, a hard disk, or a memory, in the database 330 … The recognizer 230 may be configured to scan an identifier of a to-be-assembled part and/or an identifier of a removed part, to determine whether the current scanned part matches a part recorded by the management apparatus 300, thereby improving accuracy of the device assembling system, and preventing an error in an assembled part or a removed part of a server. The identifier includes content, such as a picture or a barcode, used to identify attribute information, such as a type and a specification, of the part. The recognizer 230 is a device that can use a barcode scanner, a two-dimensional code scanner, a camera, or the like to identify attributes (such as a type and a specification) of a part by using an identifier (such as a barcode) of the part”].
As for dependent claim 7, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the method as described in claim 1 and Wu further teaches:
wherein the positioning of the workpiece on the workstation includes a retaining gate to align the workpiece [(e.g. see Wu paragraphs 0102, 0152) ”The operating table 210 is configured to fasten the server. The operating table 210 may limit and lock the server, so that the robot media handler 220 performs an assembling operation on the server, to prevent the server from being displaced in an assembling process to affect accuracy … controls the operating table 210 of the execution apparatus 200 to fasten and clamp the server”].
As for independent claim 9, Wu, Matl and Tao teach a system. Claim 9 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 1.
As for dependent claim 10, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the system as described in claim 9; further, claim 10 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 2. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 2.
As for dependent claim 11, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the system as described in claim 9; further, claim 11 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 3. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 3.
As for dependent claim 12, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the system as described in claim 11; further, claim 12 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 4. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 4.
As for dependent claim 13, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the system as described in claim 9; further, claim 13 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 5. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 5.
As for dependent claim 14, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the system as described in claim 9; further, claim 14 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 6. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 6.
As for independent claim 15, Wu, Matl and Tao teach a computer program product. Claim 15 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 1.
As for dependent claim 16, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the computer program product as described in claim 15; further, claim 16 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 2. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 2.
As for dependent claim 17, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the computer program product as described in claim 15; further, claim 17 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 3. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 3.
As for dependent claim 18, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the computer program product as described in claim 17; further, claim 18 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 4. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 4.
As for dependent claim 19, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the computer program product as described in claim 15; further, claim 19 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 5. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 5.
As for dependent claim 20, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the computer program product as described in claim 15; further, claim 20 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 6. Therefore, it is rejected with the same rational as claim 6.
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (US 2023/0150075 A1) in view of Matl et al. (US 2022/0048707 A1) and further in view of Tao et al. (US 6,243,621 B1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Co et al. (US 2010/0218050 A1).
As for dependent claim 8, Wu, Matl and Tao teach the method as described in claim 1, but do not specifically teach wherein the positioning of the workpiece on the workstation includes rollers to align the workpiece. However, in the same field of invention, Co teaches:
wherein the positioning of the workpiece on the workstation includes rollers to align the workpiece [(e.g. see Co paragraphs 0037, 0056, 0072) ”Movable trays 10 have been placed on highway conveyor 330, which may be one or more conveyor belts or rollers on one or more levels, or some other conveyor system. Each movable tray 10 can hold one or more motherboards, such as two motherboards. Movable trays 10 with loaded motherboards are moved along as highway conveyor 330 moves to the right until movable tray 10 reaches parking and testing structures 350, 352 … While conveyor belts have been described, conveyors may not use belts, but may use rollers, escalators, or other type of conveying apparatus for moving objects … Once movable tray 10 and motherboard substrate 30 are aligned the host controller or parking structure controller may instruct test station 20 to extend retractable connector 14 from well 26”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Wu, Matl, Tao and Co, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add wherein the positioning of the workpiece on the workstation includes rollers to align the workpiece, as taught by Co, to the teachings of Wu, Matl and Tao because it increases the number of components that may be serviced by a robotic handler (e.g. see Co paragraph 0019).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed 09 February 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that [“the positioning component [of Wu] determines the alignment of the tool, and not the workpiece” (Page 10).].
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner notes that the claim limitation does not define what the alignment is checked relative to or how the alignment is checked. Wu teaches checking the alignment of the workpiece in paragraph 0123 of Wu’s disclosure [“The second controller 250 may determine, based on the positioning component 225 … a position at which the gripped part is to be placed … The visual component scans a position at which the robot media handler 220 is to perform an operation, and extracts a feature of a scanned area; and compares the feature of the scanned area with a feature of a target position to determine coordinates of the position at which the robot media handler 220 is to perform the operation, and then feeds back the coordinates to the second controller 250, to accurately adjust a posture of the robot media handler 220”]. One of ordinary skill in the art, namely a software or hardware developer, would recognize that by using a camera to determine the actual coordinates of a target slot of the server workpiece, the specific alignment of the server workpiece on the operating table is checked. Thus, the combination adequately teaches applicant’s claimed limitation.
Applicant argues that [“Wu does not disclose or suggest at least ‘checking the offset of the workpiece by contacting the workpiece with the tool’ as recited in the amended claims.” (Page 10).].
The argument described above, in paragraph number 11, with respect to the newly added limitations to the independent claims has been considered, but is moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent 10,398,055 B1 issued to Tandon et al. on 27 August 2019. The subject matter disclosed therein is pertinent to that of claims 1-20 (e.g. robots for assembling custom servers).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER J FIBBI whose telephone number is (571)-270-3358. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (8am-6pm).
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, William Bashore can be reached at (571)-272-4088. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J FIBBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174