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.
Regarding claim 5, the phrase "in a case" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Examiner interprets claim 5 to include the capability of achieving the limitation following.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mette (US Patent 3,951,271 A) in view of Arnett (US Patent 4,652,204 A).
Regarding claim 1, the robot control device of Mette teaches a transport apparatus comprising:
first and second hand portions (14) that are arranged at a distance from each other in a first direction in a horizontal plane and configured to simultaneously hold a transport target object (Fig 1; Col. 3 ln 2-11);
a first moving portion that moves each of the first and second hand portions in the first direction (Fig 1; Col. 3 ln 2-5);
a second moving portion (12 + 20) that moves the first moving portion in a second direction that is perpendicular to the first direction in the horizontal plane (Fig 1; Col. 3 ln 2-10);
a third moving portion (16) that moves the second moving portion in a vertical direction (Fig 1; Col. 3 ln 2-10);
a platform (10) to which the third moving portion is fixed (Fig 1).
The robot control device of Mette is silent on the details of a wheeled base. However, the Cartesian manipulator of Arnett teaches a wheeled platform (base 12, rollers 14) to which the third moving portion is fixed (Col. 3 ln 20-24). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the robot control device of Mette with the rollers of Arnett so that the apparatus may be easily moved into a position to handle material (Col. 3 ln 20-24).
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Mette further teaches the first and second hand portions hold the transport target object in a suspending manner (Fig 1; Col. 3 ln 2-5). When the object is gripped, the target object is suspended in the air.
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Mette further teaches the first and second hand portions hold the transport target object in a sandwiching manner from both sides in the first direction (Fig 1; Col. 3 ln 2-5).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mette & Arnett in view of Hwang (CN 107718033 A).
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, the combination does not teach transporting the target object by means of electromagnets. However, the substrate transfer hand of Hwang teaches the first and second hand portions (1) hold the transport target object by means of electromagnets (6, Fig 1; Pg 2, Invention Content, body 8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the robot control device of the combination with the addition of electro-magnets to better handle metallic hardware (Pg 1, The Background Technology; Pg 2, Invention Content, body 8).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mette & Arnett in view of Strong (PGPub US 20210214205 A1).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, the combination teaches a control portion (26) that controls each of the first to third moving portions (Col. 3 ln 30-32). The combination does not teach weight sensors or the control portion moving the third moving portion in response to weight measurements.
However, the transportation device of Strong teaches a control portion (102) that controls each of the moving portions, wherein the first and second hand portions (fork 18, Fig 2-3; [0029] ln 1-5) respectively have sensors (lift sensor 1041) for acquiring weights of the transport target object ([0029] ln 1-5; [0021] ln 1-5), and
in a case in which the weights acquired by the sensors respectively included in the first and second hand portions match each other, the control portion controls the third moving portion to move the second moving portion upward ([0033]; [0003]). The transportation device of Strong teaches that when the sensors detect uneven loads, movement is prevented ([0033]). Therefore, when the loads on the forks are even, the operator may use the transportation device to move products into elevated positions ([0003]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the robot control device of the combination with the addition of the weight sensor safety system of Strong to detect hazardous load conditions and prevent dropping the target object ([0033]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent 3,760,956 A discloses an industrial robot with a first, second and third moving part with a wheeled base.
US Patent 5,672,044 A discloses a free traveling manipulator with a first, second and third moving part with a wheeled base.
US Patent 3,572,519 A discloses a manipulator with a first, second and third moving part with a wheeled base.
US Patent 3,819,061 A discloses an industrial robot with a first, second and third moving part with a wheeled base.
US Patent 3,225,590 A discloses an apparatus to determine the center of gravity with two gripper sections.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RALPH D WILKINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6183. The examiner can normally be reached 8 - 4, M-Fr.
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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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.
/RALPH D WILKINSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/Victoria P Augustine/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights