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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 6 and 7 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.
Claim 6 recites to open the valve when the shut-off switch is opened, however it is unclear whether this means to shut-off (depressurize) or turn-on (pressurize) the power supply. Examiner suggests clearly identifying what action is being performed by using more specific language.
Claim 7 is dependent on claim 6, therefore inheriting the deficiencies of claim 6 and also being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 9-14, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 10576620 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Chou et al. teaches an animated figure (robotic mobility assistant device), comprising: an appendage (frame members 10 to 28) comprising a joint (mechanical joints 80-112); and a joint restraint device coupled to the appendage (a mechanical joint means for coupling the first and second frame members, the mechanical joint device means defining a center of relative rotation of the first and second frame members about multiple mutually perpendicular axes, col 2, lines 14- 20), the joint restraint device comprising a membrane(66,68) defining an internal volume and a plurality of granules disposed within the internal volume (The compartment is made of flexible plastic, which is non-permeable to gases, and is filled with beads that are preferably made of non-deformable materials such as hard plastic, col 6, lines 10-14), wherein the joint restraint device is configured to compact the plurality of granules against each other to restrain motion of the joint in response to a vacuum pressure applied to the membrane (Joints are connected to rigidity control devices (bead-filled vacuum compartments). Negative pressure causes the bead-filled structures to form passive rigid compression elements that stiffen the joints and prevents excessive rotational movement, col 3, lines 39-43).
Regarding claim 2, Chou et al. teaches the animated figure of claim 1, comprising an actuator configured to move the appendage about the joint: It can also use hydraulic or electronic linear actuator and other mechanical apparatuses. A feature is to provide a variation of rotational axis to coordinate with user natural movement at joints between bio skeletons and to provide a light weight flexible shape compression block between frames across joint (col 11, lines 65-67). The frames, as discussed in claim 1 reading on the appendage.
Regarding claim 3, Chou et al. teaches the animated figure of claim 2, comprising a vacuum source fluidly coupled to the internal volume of the membrane, wherein the vacuum source is configured to apply vacuum pressure to the internal volume: A vacuum chamber 34 is configured in the frame wall and against the joint device. The negative/positive air pressure is provided through air pump 64 that is linked between frames and operate in joint movement; the membranes or walls of compartment 66,68 are made of an airtight flexible material such as silicon or rubber (col 11, lines 12-17).
Regarding claim 4, Chou et al. teaches the animated figure of claim 3, comprising: a conduit (see annotated Fig.15B below) fluidly coupling the vacuum source (34) to the membrane (66,68); and a valve (62) disposed along the conduit (A vacuum chamber 34 is configured in the frame wall and against the joint device. The negative/positive air pressure is provided through air pump 64 that is linked between frames and operate in joint movement; the membranes or walls of compartment 66,68 are made of an airtight flexible material such as silicon or rubber, col 11, lines 12-17),
PNG
media_image1.png
384
406
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the valve (62) is configured to selectively open to enable air to flow from the membrane toward the vacuum source (After fully rigid state, when flexibility required, the electric valve 62 opens to pressurized vacuum compartment 66,68, fast release friction between beads 69 and provide maximum fluidity (col 11, lines 24-28).
Regarding claim 5, Chou et al. teaches the animated figure of claim 4, comprising control circuitry (162) configured to simultaneously depower the actuator and open the valve: An electric valve 62 that is controlled by node spring box control 162 (FIG. 32) to remove air pressure, increasing rigidity, fix rotation center before all joint cable actuators 72 (FIG. 22A) fully loaded. After fully rigid state, when flexibility required, the electric valve 62 opens to pressurized vacuum compartment 66,68, fast release friction between beads 69 and provide maximum fluidity (col 11, lines 20-27).
Regarding claim 9, Chou et al. teaches wherein the plurality of granules is configured to flow within the internal volume of the membrane in a relatively uncompacted state without the vacuum pressure applied to the internal volume and to a compacted state against each other when the vacuum pressure is applied to the internal volume: Each air-tight compartment is in gaseous communication with a vacuum source such as a pump. As air is removed or “squeezed out” from the compartment by the vacuum, the compressive force causes the size of the compartment to contract as the beads are forced together (col 6, lines 34-38).
Regarding claim 10, Chou et al. teaches wherein the plurality of granules is configured to form a relatively rigid mass around the joint in response to the vacuum pressure being applied to the internal volume: After fully rigid state, when flexibility required, the electric valve 62 opens to pressurized vacuum compartment 66,68, fast release friction between beads 69 and provide maximum fluidity (col 11, lines 24-28). This is also seen below in Fig 11 C,D.
PNG
media_image2.png
397
410
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 11-12, Chou et al. teaches wherein the membrane is torus-shaped: the membranes or walls of compartment 66,68 are made of an airtight flexible material such as silicon or rubber. The exterior contour or shape of the chamber changes with a person's natural joint range of motion, recorded in calibration process 152, 154 (col 11, lines 14-19). While Chou et al. doesn’t specifically disclose a torus shape, this is only relating to ornamentation which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art; see MPEP 2144.04 I. This appreciates claim 12 as well, wherein the membrane is annularly disposed about the joint. The positioning of the membrane about the joint is merely relating to ornamentation.
Regarding claim 13, Chou et al. teaches a joint restraint device (mechanical joint device) for an animated figure (robotic mobility assistant device), the joint restraint device comprising: a membrane defining an internal volume (66,68); a conduit configured to fluidly couple the internal volume to a vacuum source (see annotated Fig.15B below, the membrane inherently has an internal volume as it is hollow);
PNG
media_image1.png
384
406
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a valve configured to selectively open an air flow path between the internal volume and the vacuum source via the conduit (After fully rigid state, when flexibility required, the electric valve 62 opens to pressurized vacuum compartment 66,68, fast release friction between beads 69 and provide maximum fluidity, col 11, lines 24-28); and a plurality of granules disposed within the internal volume of the membrane, wherein the plurality of granules is configured to compact against each other to form a relatively rigid body in response to a vacuum pressure applied to the internal volume: (After fully rigid state, when flexibility required, the electric valve 62 opens to pressurized vacuum compartment 66,68, fast release friction between beads 69 and provide maximum fluidity, col 11, lines 24-28). The structural limitations of the claim are the same as those aforementioned in the claims above, thus appreciated in the same manner.
Regarding claim 14, Chou et al. teaches wherein the membrane is configured to wrap around a joint of the animated figure. As discussed in the specification of the instant application, this configuration has the same meaning as claim 12 (see detailed description [0030]). Therefore, it is relating to ornamentation as well which has no mechanical function and cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art; see MPEP 2144.04 I.
Regarding claim 17, Chou et al. further teaches an appendage control system for an animated figure (Robotic mobility assistant exoskeleton with frame members, which are attached adjacent to biological joints, supplements relative movement between skeletal members, abstract), the appendage control system comprising: a plurality of actuators (cable actuators 72), wherein each actuator of the plurality of actuators is configured to move a respective appendage relative to a respective joint of the animated figure (cable actuators 72 devices to apply forces between frames and activate frames to provide controlled levels of compliance between devices in different modes of operation, col 19, lines 3-6). These frames (analogous to the appendages), are coupled to the mechanical joints (col 2, lines 14- 20); a plurality of joint restraint devices (mechanical joint devices), wherein each joint restraint device of the plurality of joint restraint devices comprises: a resilient membrane defining an internal volume (two rubber airtight membranes 66,68); and a plurality of granules disposed within the internal volume (associated with each frame is an air-tight compartment that is filled with beads, col 6, lines 10-11), wherein the plurality of granules is configured to form a relatively rigid body around a respective joint of the plurality of joints in response to a vacuum pressure applied to the internal volume (Each air-tight compartment is in gaseous communication with a vacuum source such as a pump. As air is removed or “squeezed out” from the compartment by the vacuum, the compressive force causes the size of the compartment to contract as the beads are forced together. The compartment solidifies and become rigid to fit to the user's muscular contour, col 6, lines 34-40).
Regarding claim 18, Chou et al. further teaches the appendage control system of claim 17 (Robotic mobility assistant exoskeleton with frame members, which are attached adjacent to biological joints, supplements relative movement between skeletal members, abstract of Chou et al.) comprising: a vacuum source and a valve configured to selectively open an air flow path between each respective internal volume of the plurality of joint restraint devices and the vacuum source (Instead of being connected directly to a mechanical or electrical pump, another technique of creating a vacuum within the bead-filled compartment is to connect the bead-filled compartment to a vacuum chamber 34 that is also within the frame element. The vacuum chamber is maintain at a low pressure level and is connected via a valve and/or other gas regulating device, col 6, lines 44-50). The air flow path between each respective internal volume of the plurality of joint restraint devices and the vacuum source is preserved via the rigidity control devices (joint restraint devices) in joint rigidity adjustments and the vacuum source is through the joints’ movements (col 6, lines 62-66).
Regarding claim 19, Chou et al. further teaches wherein the valve is configured to open based on a supply of power to the plurality of actuators: An electric valve 62 that is controlled by node spring box control 162 (FIG. 32) to remove air pressure, increasing rigidity, fix rotation center before all joint cable actuators 72 (FIG. 22A) fully loaded. After fully rigid state, when flexibility required, the electric valve 62 opens to pressurized vacuum compartment 66,68, fast release friction between beads 69 and provide maximum fluidity (col 11, lines 21-28).
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.
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.
1. Claims 6-7, 15-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. in view of Hayashi (US 20210283516 A1).
Regarding claim 6, while Chou et al. teaches the animated figure of claim 5 (robotic assistant device), comprising: a power supply configured to supply power to the actuator (The actuator can be powered by electrical, hydraulic or pneumatic power source, col 17, lines 21-22), and a relay circuit comprising a shut-off switch (emergency system) in series with an additional power supply (Emergency process unit 162D notices trends of losing balance and selects an immediate balance position that applies rigidity control 68 to 68E fixing all joints rotation into a balance posture and monitors user's reaction through interior pressure sensors 134, col 27, lines 63-67). The relay circuit is analogous to the emergency process unit 162D and has an emergency control system built in (shut-off). While Chou et al. doesn’t explicitly state an additional power supply, it would be obvious to have another, as this is a mere duplication of parts and has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced; see MPEP 2144.04 VI. Chou et al. further teaches to open the valve; this rigidity control from the emergency process unit is effectuated by both pumps and valves, which are inherently run by the power source and circuits (col 6, lines 44-55).
However, it fails to teach allow power from the additional power supply, wherein the relay circuit is configured to shut off the power supplied to the actuator, and the switch of when the shut-off switch is opened. Hayashi teaches this as follows: Specifically, it is sufficient that the mode setting unit instructs the power supply control circuit to interrupt the connection between the arm actuator and the power line 130 when set to the clothes changing mode. The power supply to the neck actuator may also be turned off, but as various motions are executed in the clothes changing mode too, the power supply to the neck actuator may be maintained [0102]. Furthermore, an emergency stop switch is provided in the horn 112, and a user can stop the robot immediately by pulling out the horn 112 [0031]. The power supply control circuit is analogous to the relay circuit, and the emergency stop switch is analogous to the switch of the shut-off switch.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the robotic assistant device of Chou et al. and opening of the valve with the relay circuit and emergency switch of Hayashi to continuously power the device (Hayashi, [0043).
Regarding claim 7, Chou et al. teaches the animated figure of claim 6 (robotic mobility assistant device, Chou et al.), however fails to teach wherein the shut-off switch is configured to be actuated via a controller of the animated figure. Hayashi teaches this as follows: wherein the shut-off switch (emergency stop switch) is configured to be actuated via a controller of the animated figure (The controllers are configured to execute computer-readable programs to operate one or more cable spring box 70 (FIGS. 22A,22B), cable actuators 72 devices to apply forces between frames and activate frames to provide controlled levels of compliance between devices in different modes of operation, col 19, lines 1-6).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the robotic assistant device of Chou et al. with the shut-off switch and controller of Hayashi in order to best operate the device in various modes (Hayashi, col 19, lines 1-6).
Regarding claim 15, Chou et al. teaches wherein the animated figure includes an actuator configured to move an appendage relative to the joint (It can also use hydraulic or electronic linear actuator and other mechanical apparatuses. A feature is to provide a variation of rotational axis to coordinate with user natural movement at joints between bio skeletons and to provide a light weight flexible shape compression block between frames across joint, col 11, lines 65-67), and the valve is configured to open in response (An electric air control valve 62 operated by node spring box control unit 162 is used to reduce and provide air pressure to the rigidity control compression block 68D during operation and activate and release rigid compression support, col 14, lines 59-61). However, Chou et al. fails to teach how this is in regards to an interruption of power to the actuator. Hayashi teaches this as follows: Specifically, it is sufficient that the mode setting unit instructs the power supply control circuit to interrupt the connection between the arm actuator and the power line 130 when set to the clothes changing mode. The power supply to the neck actuator may also be turned off, but as various motions are executed in the clothes changing mode too, the power supply to the neck actuator may be maintained [0102].
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the opening of the valve of Chou et al. in response to the interruption in power of the actuator of Hayashi in order to continue function of the device irrespective of power changes (Hayashi, [0102]).
Regarding claim 16, the Chou et al. teaches the joint restraint device of claim 15 (mechanical joint device, Chou et al.), comprising: a relay circuit (emergency process unit 162D) configured to: selectively enable current to flow from a power supply to the actuator (Emergency process unit 162D notices trends of losing balance and selects an immediate balance position that applies rigidity control 68 to 68E fixing all joints rotation into a balance posture and monitors user's reaction through interior pressure sensors 134, col 27, lines 63-67). The actuator is continuously activated from a power supply via the emergency process units (relay circuit) in response to the plurality of pressure measurements and plurality of environmental readings to facilitate movement along a selected path (col 3, lines 17-21); and direct power from an additional power supply to the valve (the rigidity control from the emergency process unit is effectuated by both pumps and valves, which are inherently run by the power source and circuits (col 6, lines 44-55). While Chou et al. doesn’t explicitly state an additional power supply, it would be obvious to have another, as this is a mere duplication of parts and has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced; see MPEP 2144.04 VI.
However, it fails to teach a shut-off switch configured to selectively open the relay circuit.
Hayashi teaches this as follows: circuit to interrupt the connection between the arm actuator and the power line 130 when set to the clothes changing mode. The power supply to the neck actuator may also be turned off, but as various motions are executed in the clothes changing mode too, the power supply to the neck actuator may be maintained [0102]. Furthermore, an emergency stop switch is provided in the horn 112, and a user can stop the robot immediately by pulling out the horn 112 [0031]. The power supply control circuit is analogous to the relay circuit, and the emergency stop switch is analogous to the shut-off switch.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the robotic assistant device of Chou et al. and opening of the valve with the relay circuit and emergency switch of Hayashi to continuously power the device (Hayashi, [0043).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Chou et al. teaches the appendage control system of claim 18 (Robotic mobility assistant exoskeleton with frame members, which are attached adjacent to biological joints, supplements relative movement between skeletal members, abstract of Chou et al.), comprising a shut-off switch (emergency stop switch, Hayashi), wherein power to the plurality of actuators (cable actuators 72, Chou et al.) is shut off and the valve is configured to open when the shut-off switch is open (In this fashion, when vacuum is need, the valve is opened and gas is removed from the bead-filled compartment. The vacuum chamber in turn can be connected to a pump to re-establish the vacuum therein as needed, Chou et al., col 6, lines 52-55). Although Chou et al. doesn’t explicitly teach the power to the plurality of actuators is shut off, this concept of one structure being turned off and causing another to turn on is taught in the combination of Chou et al. and Hayashi; The algorithm also implements warning and process to recover in the event of an emergency (Chou et al., col 3, lines 33-35)
It would have been readily understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Chou et al. with the process of using the shut-off switch of Hayashi in order to ensure the there is back-up/emergency system in place for continuous use of power in the appendage control system (Hayashi, [0031]).
2. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. in view of Soloman et al. (US 6428266 B1).
Chou et al. teaches the animated figure of claim 4 (robotic mobility device), but fails to teach comprising a filter disposed along the conduit, wherein the filter is configured to block the granules from flowing through the conduit. Soloman et al. teaches this as follows: As shown in FIG. 3 and 7, in each arm link 26, 28, a high-density metallic or ceramic filter 170, 172 is mounted in the bottom wall 26' of the arm link or arm "tub". The filters provide a dense barrier against entry or exit of particles from the arm links (col 6, lines 58-62).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the robotic assistant device of Chou et al. with the filter of Soloman et al. in order to reduce/eliminate risk of contamination from granules (Soloman et al., col 7, lines 2-4).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RIA SHARMA whose telephone number is (571)272-0286. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am- 5pm.
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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571) 270 1775. 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.
/RIA SHARMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3711
/NICHOLAS J. WEISS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights