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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I and species 2 which is drawn to claims 1-12 and 14-17 is acknowledged. Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected groups and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/12/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 2, the term “an operation” in line 2 should read as “the operator” since the operator is previously claimed in independent claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, the claim objected to because claim 4 includes reference characters “125” which are not enclosed within parentheses.
Reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description of the drawings and used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims should be enclosed within parentheses so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
Claims 1-2, 8-9, 12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated over Dearman (US 20110210110 A1).
Regarding independent claim 1, Dearman discloses, a mobile material processing system (see welding system 1 in Fig. 1) for performing processing operations on raw work material (see plates 301 and disclosed in para 0017 “the welding system 1 positioned on a tank component 300 (e.g., a tank bottom, side, or top) constructed from a series of individual plates 301 which form joints 305 between the plates 301.”), comprising:
a mobile base (see cart 2 in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2);
an extended selectively positionable cantilevered support member (see first arm segment 16 in Fig. 2) operatively connected to the mobile base (see Fig. 2);
a material processing implement (see welding torch/head 30 in Fig. 2);
at least one programmable collaborative robot (see second arm segment 17 in Fig. 2) operatively connected to the extended cantilevered support member (see Fig. 2) and adapted to hold and manipulate the material processing implement (see Fig. 2);
a power supply (see flux power through flux hose 23 in Fig. 2) operatively connected to the material processing implement (see Fig. 2);
a control system (see system controller 10 in Fig. 1) adapted to enable an operator to guide the robot and manipulate the material processing implement to operatively engage and process the work material in response to instructions programmed by the operator (see Fig. 5 and disclosed in para 0030 “FIG. 5 is a control schematic illustrating the flow of instructions and power between certain components in welding system 1. The user interface pendent 13 will be employed by the user to define a welding start point and the welding parameters associated therewith. Pendent 13 will provide input to system controller 10, which includes a computer processor and software for carrying out the control steps described herein. For example, controller 10 will convert user inputs to instructions readable by welding machine 6 and the self-positioning arm 4”).
Regarding claim 2, Dearman discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 1 and further discloses, wherein the mobile base (2) comprises a mobile cart (see cart 2 with wheels 7 in Fig. 2) adapted to be relocated by an operator to bring the mobile material processing system (see Figs. 1 and 2) to the work material (301).
Regarding claim 8, Dearman discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 1 and further discloses, wherein the at least one programmable collaborative robot includes a programmable robot arm having a built-in safety mechanism (disclosed in para 0025 “a motion detector 38 acting as a safety device. If motion detector 38 senses movement (e.g., a person inadvertently encroaching on the welding area) within a proximity considered unsafe, the motion detector will initiate a safety shut-down of the welding system. In one embodiment, motion detector 38 is a sonic-based sensor. Alternative sensors could include, infra-red bases sensors, mechanical sensors, or electro-mechanical sensors”).
Regarding claim 9, Dearman discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 8 and further discloses, wherein the mobile base includes a safety system which permits the collaborative welding system to be operated at a faster speed under predetermined conditions which are safe for an operator and which reduces the system operating speed in accordance with recognized safety standards in response to conditions detected by the safety system mechanism (disclosed in para 0025 “a motion detector 38 acting as a safety device. If motion detector 38 senses movement (e.g., a person inadvertently encroaching on the welding area) within a proximity considered unsafe, the motion detector will initiate a safety shut-down of the welding system. In one embodiment, motion detector 38 is a sonic-based sensor. Alternative sensors could include, infra-red bases sensors, mechanical sensors, or electro-mechanical sensors”).
Regarding claim 12, Dearman discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 1 and further discloses, wherein the material processing implement comprises a welding torch (see welding torch/head 30 in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 14, Dearman discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 1 and further discloses, further including a mounting or connecting mechanism (see lower joint 19 in Fig. 2) adapted to operatively connect the extended selectively positionable cantilevered support member to the mobile base (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 15, Dearman discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 14 and further discloses, wherein the mounting or connecting mechanism (19) comprises a pivot connection including a mounting plate (see annotated Fig. 2) secured to a proximal end of the cantilever beam (see annotated Fig. 2), the mounting plate further being rotatably secured to a bearing shaft or post (see annotated Fig. 2) operatively connected to the mobile base (see annotated Fig. 2 and disclosed in para 0022 “First arm segment 16 is connected to rotating base 15 by the pivot joint 19 which includes its own servo motor to allow first arm segment 16 to controllably rotate around the axis A seen in FIG. 2”).
PNG
media_image1.png
764
831
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 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.
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.
Claims 3 -7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dearman in view of Song (KR 102302908 B1 and see PDF translation attached).
Regarding claim 3, Dearman discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 1 and further discloses, wherein the mobile base includes an upper work surface (see upper surface of the flat base platform 8 in Fig. 2) or table supported by a frame (see flat base platform 8 in Fig. 2), a plurality of supporting legs (see legs 35 in Fig. 2) operatively connected to the frame (see Fig. 2) and a bottom or lower platform (see bottom surface of the flat base platform 8 in Fig. 2)
However, Dearman does not explicitly disclose, the bottom or lower platform adapted to stow and transport system accessory equipment.
Nonetheless, Nakasugi teaches, a bottom or lower platform (see table T in Fig. 2) adapted to stow and transport system accessory equipment (see Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or at the time before the effective filling date (post AIA ) to modify the platform 8 of Dearman so as the platform has a bottom or lower platform adapted to stow and transport system accessory equipment as taught/suggested by Song in order to keep the control system, power supply, and/or system accessory equipment close to the robot for quick access and reduced cable runs.
Regarding claim 4, Dearman and Song discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 3 and Dearman further discloses, wherein the bottom or lower platform (see bottom surface of the flat base platform 8 in Fig. 2) includes a bottom surface (see Fig. 2) and a plurality of wheels (see wheels 7 in Fig. 2 and Fig. 4A) or casters 125 operatively connected to the bottom surface (see Fig. 2 and Fig. 4A).
Regarding claim 5, Dearman and Song discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 3 and Dearman further discloses, wherein each one of the plurality of supporting legs (35) includes a levelling device or foot operatively connected thereto (see Fig. 4A and disclosed in para 0018 “The legs 35 will generally comprise an internally threaded sleeve 37 attached to a disc-shaped footing 47. Internally threaded sleeves 37 engage a threaded post 36 which is connected to base platform 8. Servo motors 39 will rotate sleeves 37 relative to post 36 in order to raise and lower legs 35”).
Regarding claim 6, Dearman and Song discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 3, however, Dearman does not explicitly disclose wherein the upper work surface or table includes a gridded work surface adapted to receive and secure work material and work holding fixtures thereto.
Song further teaches, wherein the upper work surface or table includes a gridded work surface adapted to receive and secure work material and work holding fixtures thereto (see table T in Fig. 2 and disclosed in the specication “a plurality of holes are formed on the welding table (T) at predetermined intervals, the welding specimen is fixed in the hole, and when the welding specimen is larger than the welding table (T), an auxiliary table is provided in the hole It may be fixed to expand the welding table (T)”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or at the time before the effective filling date (post AIA ) to modify the work surface of Dearman wherein the upper work surface or table includes a gridded work surface adapted to receive and secure work material and work holding fixtures thereto as taught/suggested by Song in order to prevent damage to work material during the process.
Regarding claim 7, Dearman and Song discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 6, however, Dearman does not explicitly disclose wherein the gridded work surface includes a plurality of apertures formed therein, each of the apertures being adapted to releasably receive a clamp or other securement device for holding a workpiece, fixture, assembly or raw work material in a fixed position during the performance of a work material processing sequence.
Song further teaches, wherein the gridded work surface includes a plurality of apertures formed therein, each of the apertures being adapted to releasably receive a clamp or other securement device for holding a workpiece, fixture, assembly or raw work material in a fixed position during the performance of a work material processing sequence (see table T in Fig. 2 and disclosed in the specication “a plurality of holes are formed on the welding table (T) at predetermined intervals, the welding specimen is fixed in the hole, and when the welding specimen is larger than the welding table (T), an auxiliary table is provided in the hole It may be fixed to expand the welding table (T)”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or at the time before the effective filling date (post AIA ) to modify the work surface of Dearman wherein the gridded work surface includes a plurality of apertures formed therein, each of the apertures being adapted to releasably receive a clamp or other securement device for holding a workpiece, fixture, assembly or raw work material in a fixed position during the performance of a work material processing sequence as taught/suggested by Song in order to prevent damage to work material during the process.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dearman in view of Xu (CN 215238796 U and see PDF translation attached).
Regarding claim 10, Dearman discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 1 and further discloses, wherein the at least one collaborative robot (17) comprises a programmable robot arm (see annotated Fig. 2), a base (see upper joint 19 or annotated robot arm in Fig. 2) operatively connected to the robot arm and adapted to mount the robot arm to the extended cantilevered support member (see arm 17 is connected with base/upper joint 19 to arm 16 in Fig. 2).
However, Dearman does not explicitly disclose, an electrically isolating pad positioned intermediate the base and the extended cantilevered support member.
Nonetheless, Nakasugi teaches, an electrically isolating pad (see insulating pad 13 with insulating electric wood 10 in Fig. 1) positioned intermediate the base (see arm 14 in Fig. 3) and the extended arm member (see support 12 in Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or at the time before the effective filling date (post AIA ) to modify the base and the extended cantilevered support member of Dearman wherein an electrically isolating pad positioned intermediate the base and the extended cantilevered support member as taught/suggested by Xu in order to prevent current leakage and short circuits.
Regarding claim 11, Dearman and Song discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 10 and Dearman further discloses, wherein programmable robot arm includes a built-in safety mechanism (disclosed in para 0025 “a motion detector 38 acting as a safety device. If motion detector 38 senses movement (e.g., a person inadvertently encroaching on the welding area) within a proximity considered unsafe, the motion detector will initiate a safety shut-down of the welding system. In one embodiment, motion detector 38 is a sonic-based sensor. Alternative sensors could include, infra-red bases sensors, mechanical sensors, or electro-mechanical sensors”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16 and 17 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:
Regarding claim 16, Dearman discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 14 and further discloses, wherein the mounting or connecting mechanism comprises a mounting plate secured to a proximal end of the cantilever beam (see annotated Fig. 2), a servo motor mounted on the mobile base (disclosed in para 0022 “First arm segment 16 is connected to rotating base 15 by the pivot joint 19 which includes its own servo motor to allow first arm segment 16 to controllably rotate around the axis A seen in FIG. 2”).
However, Dearman does not explicitly disclose, a slewing ring operatively connected to a bottom surface of the mounting plate, and a pinion gear operatively connected to the servo motor and adapted to rotatably engage the slewing ring. No additional evidence was found to reasonably render a case of obviousness against the claimed invention. As such, claim 16 is allowed.
Regarding claim 17, Dearman discloses, the mobile material processing system of claim 14 and further discloses, wherein the mounting or connecting mechanism comprises a mounting plate secured to a proximal end of the cantilever beam (see annotated Fig. 2), a servo motor mounted on the mobile base (disclosed in para 0022 “First arm segment 16 is connected to rotating base 15 by the pivot joint 19 which includes its own servo motor to allow first arm segment 16 to controllably rotate around the axis A seen in FIG. 2”).
However, Dearman does not explicitly disclose, the mounting or connecting mechanism comprises a rotatably engaged slewing ring and worm gear mechanism, the slewing ring being operatively connected to a bottom surface of mounting plate secured to a proximal end of the cantilever beam, and a worm gear and a servo motor operatively connected to the mobile base. No additional evidence was found to reasonably render a case of obviousness against the claimed invention. As such, claim 17 is allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-6015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday approx. 9:00 am-5:00 pm ET.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on (571) 270-5569. 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.
/VY T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights