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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 13, “effector is mounted” should be --effector blade is mounted--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “damper mechanism” in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The limitation “the first end effector blade” is already claimed in claim 1 from which claim 3 depends thus making claim 3 improperly dependent. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Note claims 11 and 17 depend from claim 3.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakao et al. (20090175705). Regarding claims 1 and 3, Nakao et al. discloses an apparatus with an end effector wrist unit 40, the end effector wrist unit including a wrist unit housing (not numbered), an end effector mount assembly 40a,40b,71 having a first end effector mount 40a, and one or more rotational interfaces 40b, wherein the first end effector mount 40a is configured to mechanically connect with a first end effector blade 17,70a having a major surface defining a first plane, the end effector mount assembly is connected with the wrist unit housing via the one or more rotational interfaces 40b such that the end effector mount assembly is rotatable through a first angular range of motion θb relative to the wrist unit housing and about a first axis, and the first axis is substantially parallel to the first plane when the first end effector blade 17,70a is mounted to the first end effector mount 40a. See Nakao et al., Fig. 5, paragraphs [0048], [0049], and[0058].
Regarding claim 2, Nakao et al. discloses that the first end effector mount 40a has a first planar end effector mounting surface that is configured to mate against the first end effector blade 17 when the first end effector mount 40b is mated to the first end effector blade 17 and the first planar end effector mounting surface is parallel to the first axis.
Regarding claim 6, Nakao et al. discloses that the first angular range of motion is less than 10 degrees. See Nakao et al. Paragraph [0058].
Regarding claim 11, Nakao et al. discloses a second end effector blade 70b that is fixed with respect to the end effector mount assembly 40a,40b,71.
Regarding claim 12, Nakao et al. discloses that the first and second end effector blades 70a,b each have corresponding distal ends and corresponding proximal ends, the proximal ends of the first and second end effector blades 70a,b are fixedly mounted to the end effector mount assembly 40a,40b,71, the distal ends of the first and second end effector blades each have a corresponding distal cleat 28y mounted thereto, each distal cleat 28y has riser portion extending away from the corresponding end effector blade and a catch surface extending outward from the riser portion thereof, and each catch surface is spaced apart from the corresponding end effector blade by at least a first gap distance. See Nakao et al. fig 3 and paragraph [0050].
Regarding claim 13, Nakao et al. discloses that each catch surface slopes away from the corresponding end effector blade 70a,b,17 with increasing distance from the riser portion from which that catch surface extends.
Regarding claim 14, Nakao et al. discloses an actuator mechanism 28c and a proximal cleat 28b,28y, wherein the actuator mechanism 28c has a first portion and a second portion, the first portion of the actuator mechanism is fixed with respect to the end effector mount assembly 40a,40b, the second portion of the actuator mechanism is configured to be movable between a first configuration and a second configuration relative to the first portion of the actuator mechanism, the proximal cleat 28b,28y is fixed with respect to the second portion of the actuator mechanism and has a catch surface that faces in substantially the same direction as the catch surfaces of the distal cleats, the catch surface of the proximal cleat and the catch surfaces of the distal cleats, in the first configuration, do not overlap a first reference circle when the second portion of the actuator mechanism is in the first configuration, the catch surface of the proximal cleat and the catch surfaces of the distal cleats, in the second configuration, all overlap a second reference circle when the second portion of the actuator mechanism is in the second configuration, and the first reference circle and the second reference circle have the same diameter. See Nakao et al. Fig. 3, Fig. 7, paragraph [0040], and paragraph [0050].
Regarding claim 15, Nakao et al. discloses that the first reference circle has an inherent diameter selected from the group consisting of 200 mm, 300 mm, and 450 mm. See Nakao et al. paragraphs [0018] and [0040].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakao et al., as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Van der Meulen et al. (20070264106). Regarding claims 17 and 18, Nakao et al. discloses all of the claimed subject matter except that the first end effector blade is made of a ceramic material/silicon carbide.
Van der Meulen et al. teaches for an end effector blade 49002 and that (claims 18 and 19) the first end effector blade 49002 is made of a ceramic material/silicon carbide for the purposes of avoid subsequent machining or other finishing steps. See Van der Meulen et al. Fig. 49 and paragraph [0199]
Since Nakao et al. and Van der Meulen et al. are both in the same field of endeavor the purpose disclosed by Van der Meulen et al. would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Nakao et al. It would have been obvious at a time before the invention was effectively filed to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify first end effector blade of Nakao et al. to be made of a ceramic material/silicon carbide for the purposes of avoid subsequent machining or other finishing steps.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Nakao et al. discloses a base 23, one or more robot arm links 24,25,21, and a wrist drive unit 40, wherein the one or more robot arm links include a first robot arm link that is configured to be rotatable relative to the base and about a base axis, the wrist drive unit is supported by the one or more robot arm links and includes a wrist mount that is rotatable about an axis that is perpendicular to an axis that is parallel to the base axis, and the end effector wrist unit is mounted to the wrist mount. See Nakao et al. Figs. 2 and 6
Prior Art
Prior art made of record but not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure for showing other end effector wrist units with mount assemblies, rotational interfaces and end effector blades.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 7-10 and 16 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 improvements comprise (claim 4) a first positive stop and a second positive stop, the first positive stop positioned so as to contact a portion of the end effector mount assembly when the end effector mount assembly is at a first rotational limit of the first angular range of motion and the second positive stop positioned so as to contact a portion of the end effector mount assembly when the end effector mount assembly is at a second rotational limit of the first angular range of motion, (claim 7) a damper mechanism that is configured to damp rotational movement of the end effector mount assembly relative to the wrist unit housing, and (claim 16) the end effector wrist unit is configured such that: when the end effector wrist unit is positioned in a first orientation with the first axis horizontal and the first plane substantially horizontal, the end effector mount assembly moves to the first rotational limit of the first angular range of motion due solely to gravitational loading, and when the end effector wrist unit is positioned in a second orientation opposite the first orientation, the end effector mount assembly also moves to the second rotational limit of the first angular range of motion due solely to gravitational loading.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Thomas Lazo whose telephone number is (571) 272-4818. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor Nathaniel Wiehe, can be reached on (571) 272-8648. The fax phone number for this Group 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.
/THOMAS E LAZO/Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 3745
June 4, 2026
Prosecution Insights