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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, filed 03/27/2026, with respect to rejections under 35 USC 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 2-3 under 35 USC 112 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 03/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive:
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “[t]hey do not sandwich” (p.11, line 20), “no rotor that extends axially through the length of the module” (p.11, line 27), and “self-contained, modular building block” (p. 12, line 12)) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Specifically, the relationship “the further rotary drive's stator is arranged on a side of the motor circuit board facing away from the gearbox and the rotary drive's stator is arranged on a side of the motor circuit board facing towards the gearbox” as taught by KIM is further accentuated in the annotated Fig. 2, below. The motors 91 and 92 are on opposite sides of the circuit board, vis-à-vis the gearbox 951/961 (though the circuit board of KIM is not in a sandwich relationship with, not between, or not intersecting with the rotation axis of, the two motors).
PNG
media_image1.png
810
457
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In response to applicant's argument that KIM is directed to a differential-type drive, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). In the case of the combination of GUAN with KIM, the introduction of KIM as a teaching reference amounts primarily to a simple duplication of parts and resultant placement of said parts relative to common components. See MPEP 2144.04 VI.B.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, KIM specifically teaches benefits of its arrangement and both references recite a common goal of compactness.
In response to applicant's argument that KIM is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, both KIM and GUAN are in the same field of endeavor, i.e. both references are directed to ‘robot drive modules for driving a rotary joint movement of a robot’ and further are recognized as in the same classification area by, at least, B25J19/00.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, page 2, line 7 appears to have two consecutive commas. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-6, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by GUAN (CN 109551510; previously cited) in view of KIM (US 20230356417).
Regarding claim 1, GUAN discloses a robot drive module for driving a rotary joint movement of a robot, wherein the robot drive module comprises:
a rotary drive (see para [0034]) comprising a motor circuit board (300), a stator (11), and a rotor (12), wherein the rotor (12) is configured to rotate, controlled by the motor circuit board (300), relative to the stator (11) about an axis of rotation (see Fig. 2),
PNG
media_image2.png
1120
862
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a gearbox (30) configured to transform, according to a defined gear ratio, a rotary motion of the rotor (12) about the axis of rotation into a rotary motion of a gearbox output component (200) about the axis of rotation, wherein – axially with respect to the axis of rotation – the motor circuit board (300) and the stator (11) are arranged on one side of the gearbox (30), denoted gearbox input side, and the gearbox output component (200) engages the gearbox (30) from the other side of the gearbox (30), denoted gearbox output side (see Fig. 2), and
a rotary encoder (41, 42) configured to detect a rotation of the gearbox output component (200) about the axis of rotation (see para [0039]),
a connecting part (50, 51) which extends from the gearbox output side to the gearbox input side and is configured to pick up the rotation of the gearbox output component (200) in a rigid manner, thereby providing rotation of the connecting part (50, 51) identical to the rotation of the gearbox output component (200) (see Fig. 2 and para [0044]), and
the rotary encoder (41, 42) is arranged on the gearbox input side and configured to detect a rotation of the connecting part (50, 51) about the axis of rotation (see Fig. 2),
the robot drive module comprises a further rotary encoder (41 & 42).
However, GUAN does not disclose wherein the robot drive module comprises a further rotary drive comprising a stator and a rotor, wherein the further rotary drive's rotor is configured to rotate relative to the further rotary drive's stator about the axis of rotation, wherein: the further rotary drive's stator is arranged on a side of the motor circuit board facing away from the gearbox and the rotary drive's stator is arranged on a side of the motor circuit board facing towards the gearbox, the further rotary drive's rotor axially extends from the gearbox input side to the gearbox output side in an area located radially on the inside of the rotary drive, and configured to provide detection of a rotation, about the axis of rotation, of a rotating component driven by the further rotary drive, wherein a sensing arrangement of the further rotary encoder is arranged on the motor circuit board on the side of the motor circuit board facing away from the gearbox.
KIM discloses a robot drive module comprising a pair of rotary drives (91, 92) with rotors configured to rotate relative to the same axis of rotation, wherein: the further rotary drive's (92) stator is arranged on a side of the motor circuit board facing away from the gearbox and the rotary drive's (91) stator is arranged on a side of the motor circuit board facing towards the gearbox, the further rotary drive's rotor axially extends from the gearbox input side to the gearbox output side in an area located radially on the inside of the rotary drive (see Fig. 2 and 3), and the second encoder (94) configured to provide detection of a rotation, about the axis of rotation, of a rotating component driven by the further rotary drive, wherein a sensing arrangement of the further rotary encoder is arranged on the motor circuit board on the side of the motor circuit board facing away from the gearbox (Fig. 2 and 3 and para [0094]).
It 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 to provide the robot drive module of GUAN with a further rotary drive comprising a stator and a rotor, wherein the further rotary drive's rotor is configured to rotate relative to the further rotary drive's stator about the axis of rotation, wherein: the further rotary drive's stator is arranged on a side of the motor circuit board facing away from the gearbox and the rotary drive's stator is arranged on a side of the motor circuit board facing towards the gearbox, the further rotary drive's rotor axially extends from the gearbox input side to the gearbox output side in an area located radially on the inside of the rotary drive, and the second encoder configured to provide detection of a rotation, about the axis of rotation, of a rotating component driven by the further rotary drive, wherein a sensing arrangement of the further rotary encoder is arranged on the motor circuit board on the side of the motor circuit board facing away from the gearbox similar to KIM.
A person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains would have been motivated to make such modification in order to provide a drive that reacts quickly to detected conditions, for collision avoidance, but that is also compact (see paras [0004-00010]).
PNG
media_image3.png
963
755
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, GUAN in view of KIM teaches the robot drive module according to claim 1, wherein the rotary encoder (41, 42) comprises a code carrier (41) and a sensor arrangement, wherein the code carrier (41) and the sensor arrangement (42) are rotatable with respect to one another about the axis of rotation, and the sensor arrangement (42) is configured to provide derivation of a rotary position or a change in rotary position of the code carrier (41) relative to the axis of rotation, wherein the code carrier (41) is arranged on a distal end of the connecting part (50) on the gearbox input side (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, GUAN in view of KIM teaches the robot drive module according to claim 2, wherein the sensor arrangement (42) is arranged on the motor circuit board (300) (as broadly claimed, see para [0039]).
Regarding claim 4, GUAN in view of KIM teaches the robot drive module according to claim 1, wherein the connecting part (50, 51) extends past the gearbox (30) in an area located radially on the inside of the gearbox (30) (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, GUAN in view of KIM teaches the robot drive module according to claim 1, wherein the robot drive module comprises a hollow part axially extending through the drive module and being located radially on the inside of the gearbox (30), in particular with a magnet (41) at one distal end of the hollow part and a hall sensor (42) on the motor circuit board (300) for measuring an absolute rotary angle (see Fig. 2 and para [0039]).
Regarding claim 6, GUAN in view of KIM teaches the robot drive module according to claim 1, wherein the robot drive module comprises a rotation sensor configured to provide control data for driving movement of the rotor, and/or the rotary drive is configured to use position information from the rotary encoder to control movement of the rotor (see GUAN para [0040]).
Regarding claim 17, GUAN in view of KIM teaches the robot drive module according to claim 2.
However, neither GUAN nor KIM specifically discloses the code carrier is a glass circular encoder and the sensor arrangement is configured for optical detection of the code carrier.
KIM teaches substituting optical encoders for magnetic encoders for its pitch output encoder 70 and roll output encoder 80 (para [0097]).
It 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 to provide the encoders of GUAN in view of KIM with the code carrier is a glass circular encoder and the sensor arrangement is configured for optical detection of the code carrier, similar to the pitch and roll output encoders of KIM.
A person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains would have been motivated to make such modification as such substitution is recognized as a known equivalent in KIM (para [0097]; see also MPEP 2144.06.II)
Regarding claim 20, GUAN in view of KIM teaches the robot drive module according to claim 1, for driving a rotary joint movement of a metrology robot and/or humanoid robot (GUAN teaches that the joint is designed for measurement or use in a robot for ‘inspection’ and thus a ‘metrology robot’ as broadly claimed; see para [0004]).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUAN in view of KIM as applied to claims 5-6 above, and further in view of LOOSARARIAN (US 20230390930).
Regarding claim 18, GUAN in view of KIM teaches the robot drive module according to claim 5.
However, GUAN in view of KIM does not teach a magnet at one distal end of the hollow part and a hall sensor on the motor circuit board for measuring an absolute rotary angle.
LOOSARARIAN teaches a robot drive module 4912 with a magnet at one distal end of the hollow part and a hall sensor 5524 for measuring an absolute rotary angle (para [0664-0665]).
It 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 to provide the robot drive module of GUAN in view of KIM with a magnet at one distal end of the hollow part and a hall sensor on the motor circuit board for measuring an absolute rotary angle, similar to LOOSARARIAN.
A person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains would have been motivated to make such modification in order to “provide for an independent determination of the movement of the inspection robot, thereby allowing for corrections” as taught by LOOSARARIAN (para [0665])
Regarding claim 19, GUAN in view of KIM teaches the robot drive module according to claim 6.
However, GUAN in view of KIM does not teach the rotation sensor is embodied as hall sensor or wherein the rotation sensor is configured to provide the control data based on magnetic feedback from motor coils of the rotary drive.
LOOSARARIAN teaches a robot drive module 4912 with a rotation sensor embodied as hall sensor hall sensor 5524 (para [0664-0665]).
It 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 to provide the robot drive module of GUAN in view of KIM with the rotation sensor is embodied as hall sensor, similar to LOOSARARIAN.
A person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains would have been motivated to make such modification in order to “provide for an independent determination of the movement of the inspection robot, thereby allowing for corrections” as taught by LOOSARARIAN (para [0665])
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN STEFANON whose telephone number is (703)756-4648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays 8AM - 5PM EDT.
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, Oluseye Iwarere can be reached at (571) 270-5112. 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.
/JUSTIN STEFANON/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/OLUSEYE IWARERE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights