3DETAILED 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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10, 14-17, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gupta et al. (US 10,946,528).
With respect to claim 1, Gupta et al. disclose a robot comprising: a mobile base (350) having a platform (Fig 3); and a robot body comprising: a first robotic leg (326) having a first foot (column 13, lines 4-8), a first lower leg member (346) mechanically coupled to the first foot, and a first upper leg member (338) mechanically coupled to the first lower leg member (Fig 3), wherein the first foot is fastened to the platform (column 12, lines 36-38; leg may be attached to the base 350; so if a foot is used, the foot would be attached to the base); a second robotic leg (328) having a second foot (column 13, lines 4-8), a second lower leg member (348) mechanically coupled to the second foot, and a second upper leg member (340) mechanically coupled to the second lower leg member, wherein the second foot is fastened to the platform (column 12, lines 36-38; leg may be attached to the base 350; so if a foot is used, the foot would be attached to the base); and a robotic torso (310) mechanically coupled to the first upper leg member and the second upper leg member (via 334 and 336).
With respect to claim 2, wherein the first lower leg member is mechanically coupled to the first foot by a first joint having a first degree of freedom (motorized ankle joint disclosed in column 12, lines 36-38), and wherein the first foot remains fastened to the platform during and after actuation of the first degree of freedom (foot fixed to the base; column 13, lines 4-8).
With respect to claim 3, wherein the second lower leg member is mechanically coupled to the second foot by a second joint having a second degree of freedom (motorized ankle joint disclosed in column 12, lines 36-38), and wherein the second foot remains fastened to the platform during and after actuation of the second degree of freedom (foot fixed to the base; column 13, lines 4-8).
With respect to claim 4, wherein the first lower leg member is mechanically coupled to the first foot by a first joint having a first degree of freedom (motorized ankle joint disclosed in column 12, lines 36-38), wherein the first upper leg member is mechanically coupled to the first lower leg member by a second joint (342) having a second degree of freedom, wherein the robotic torso is mechanically coupled to the first upper leg member by a third joint (334) having a third degree of freedom, and wherein the first foot and the second foot remain fastened to the platform during and after any combination of actuation of the first, second, and third degrees of freedom (foot fixed to the base; column 13, lines 4-8).
With respect to claim 5, wherein the second lower leg member is mechanically coupled to the second foot by a fourth joint having a fourth degree of freedom (motorized ankle joint disclosed in column 12, lines 36-38), wherein the second upper leg member is mechanically coupled to the second lower leg member by a fifth joint (344) having a fifth degree of freedom, wherein the robotic torso is mechanically coupled to the second upper leg member by a sixth joint (336) having a sixth degree of freedom, and wherein the first foot and the second foot remain fastened to the platform during and after any combination of actuation of the fourth, fifth, and sixth degrees of freedom (foot fixed to the base; column 13, lines 4-8).
With respect to claim 6, further comprising a joint member (330 and 332 together form hip joint) coupled to the robotic torso by a first joint (waist joint 324), coupled to the first upper leg member by a second joint (334), and coupled to the second upper leg member by a third joint (336).
With respect to claim 7, wherein the first joint includes at least a first actuator controllable to rotate the robotic torso relative to the joint member (motorized waist joint controllable fog IoT gateway processor 302).
With respect to claim 8, wherein the second joint (334) includes at least a second actuator (motorized), wherein the third joint (336) includes at least a third actuator (motorized), and wherein the second and third actuators are controllable to rotate the joint member (330 and 332 together form hip joint) and the robotic torso (310) relative to the first upper leg member (338) and the second upper leg member (340).
With respect to claim 10, wherein the robot body further comprises: a robotic arm (312) mechanically coupled to a side of the robotic torso; and an end effector (320) mechanically coupled to the robotic arm, the end effector having at least one digit having at least one degree of freedom (column 12, lines 23-28).
With respect to claim 14, wherein the mobile base comprises a propulsion system operable to cause motion of the mobile base (column 19, lines 30-61).
With respect to claim 15, wherein the robot body is a humanoid robot body (Fig 3).
With respect to claim 16, wherein the mobile base houses (within housing 352) a plurality of components (214, 313, 384) for operation of the robot, and wherein at least one of the plurality of components is coupled to the robot body (Figs 2, 3, and Fig 6C).
With respect to claim 17, wherein the plurality of components comprise a battery (214, 313) electrically coupled to the robot body and operable to provide electrical power to the robot body.
With respect to claim 19, wherein the mobile base comprises a plurality of wheels (384), and wherein the plurality of components comprise an electric motor operable to rotate the plurality of wheels (column 13, lines 27-35).
With respect to claim 20, the apparatus discussed above meets the method limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. in view of Tandon et al. (US 10,398,055).
With respect to claim 9, Gupta et al. disclose the claimed invention discussed above but do not disclose wherein the mobile base has a weight that counterbalances a weight of the robot when the robotic torso and joint member rotate relative to the first upper leg member and the second upper leg member such that the robotic torso overhangs the mobile base. Tandon et al., however, disclose a mobile base that has a counterweight that counterbalances a weight of the robot when performing tasks (column 16, lines 44-51). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to modify the invention of Gupta et al. in view of the teachings of Tandon et al. to have a counterbalance on the base in order to help prevent the robot from tipping over while performing tasks that requiring the robot to bend over.
Claims 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. in view of Brenner (DE102020107018A1).
With respect to claims 11 and 12, Gupta et al. disclose the claimed invention discussed above but do not disclose further comprising a hydraulic system operatively coupled to the end effector to actuate the at least one degree of freedom. Brenner, however, disclose a hydraulic system operatively coupled to the end effector (10) to actuate at least one degree of freedom ([0003] of attached translation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to modify the invention of Gupta et al. in view of the teachings of Brenner to have a hydraulic system connected to the end effector in order to provide smooth, powerful motion that allow the end effector to hold loads without continuous power. While Brenner discloses hydraulic hoses attached to a base (Fig 1), the combination does not disclose that the hydraulic system is attached to the robotic torso. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to attach the hydraulic system to the torso in order to have a central location where the hydraulic lines could connect to the entire robotic body. It has also been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
With respect to claim 13, Brenner discloses that the hydraulic system is attached to a base/chassis (49).
Claims 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al.
With respect to claim 18, Gupta et al. disclose the claimed invention discussed above as well as a controller (302, 303, 325) communicatively coupled to the robot body and operable to control an action of the robot body, but Gupta et al. do not disclose that the controller is located in the mobile base. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to modify the invention of Gupta et al. such that the controller and other components are housed in the base, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. Also, by placing components in the base, the center of gravity is lowered, and the components are better protected in case the robot tips over.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DREW J BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-1362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday.
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, Paul Dickson can be reached on 571-272-7742. 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.
DREW BROWN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/DREW J BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614