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 15-20 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.
Claims 15-20 are indefinite and vague. Which element is applicant referring to as “the rotating?” Is applicant referring to “the rotating of the grasper or the rotating of the receptacle?”
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.
Claims 1, 5-7, 14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamato, US 2021/0179265 A1, in view of Gabriel, U.S. Patent No. 5868357.
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Yamato ‘265 discloses an apparatus (see figures 1 or 3) comprising: a receptacle (i.e., an underside chassis body of 2) configured to be coupled to an aerial vehicle 2, a winch 3 configured to be coupled to the receptacle and the aerial vehicle (see figures 1 or 3), and a grasper (4 or 5) having a linkage 51, the grasper 5 configured to be coupled to the winch 3 by a tether 31, the linkage of the grasper configured to be releasably coupled to a package T, the grasper 5 configured to be rotated to a predefined alignment (i.e., using 8-10, 22) as the winch 3 raises the grasper (4 or 5) contacts the receptacle (see drawing below, which 51A opens and closes for 4) towards a guide portion of the predefined alignment by different locations from bottom to up (i.e., claims 5-7 and 18-20), see figures 1-3.
Gabriel ‘357 discloses a multi-bar linkage (3-5, 11, see figure 1) as a grasper.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the grasper of Yamato ‘265 to include a multi-linkage as suggested by Gabriel ‘357 to grasp an item for moving. Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
PNG
media_image1.png
640
432
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-13 are allowed.
Claims 15-17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 2-4 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The claims 2-4, 8-13, and 15-17 are patentable over the prior art of record because the teachings of the references taken as a whole do not show or render obvious the combination set forth in claims 2-4, 8-13, and 15-17, including every structural element recited in the claim, especially the concept of the grasper with the multi-bar linkage includes a magnet, the receptacle includes a magnet, and wherein each magnet either couples or repels the other in order to help guide the grasper into the receptacle. The prior art of record, Yamato ‘265 shows a magnetic attraction between the package and the grasper, but not on the receptacle as claimed by the applicant.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the device as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the device in the manner required by the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG K KIM whose telephone number is 571-272-6947. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 9 P.M or Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 7 P.M.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Robert Hodge, can be reached on (571) 272-2097. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
SK
6/26/26
/SANG K KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights