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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 2. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-11 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.
In claim 1, lines 11 and 12, applicant claims “the handrail body is in a second turning position, the handrail body and the connecting member are attached to the robot body”. This is indefinite since it seems to imply that the handrail body and connecting member are not attached to the robot body in the first position. However, it does not appear that the handrail body or connecting member are ever unattached to the robot body. It is suggested the phrase be changed to, “the handrail body is in a second turning position, the handrail body and the connecting member are in in contact with the robot body”.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the display screen" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the direction of forward movement of the robot" in lines 3 and 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 (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 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, 4, 5, 7, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Juxing (Chinese Patent Publication CN212193157).
Re claim 1, Juxing discloses a robot, comprising a robot body (4, figure 1); a first bracket (one of 73 shown in figure 3) mounted in the robot body; a handrail assembly comprising a connecting member (see the annotated figure below), a handrail body (see the annotated figure below) provided at an end of the connecting member, and a first assembly end provided at another end of the connecting member (see the annotated figure below); and a turning mechanism comprising a first shaft (see the annotated figure below), the first shaft being connected to the first assembly end and the first bracket, the handrail body and the connecting member being capable of turning around an axis of the first shaft relative to the robot body; wherein when the handrail assembly is in a first turning position, the handrail body is away from the robot body robot (see page 7 of the machine translation which states that the handrail can be rotated upwards to open), and when the handrail body is in a second turning position, the handrail body and the connecting member are attached to the robot body (as in the position shown in figures 1 and 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
544
536
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 2, the turning mechanism further comprises a limiting structure, an end of the limiting structure (see the annotated figure below) is connected to an end of the connecting member adjacent to the handrail body, another end of the limiting structure is assembled to the first bracket (see the annotated figure below), and the limiting structure is configured to limit the handrail body and the connecting member in the first turning position (see page 7 of the machine translation which describes this functionality).
PNG
media_image2.png
545
536
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re claim 4, the handrail body and the connecting member are integrally formed (as shown by the figures, the handrail body and connecting member are one piece).
Re claim 5, two turning mechanisms are provided, and two first brackets are provided correspondingly, the two first brackets are provided opposite to each other, and the turning mechanisms are arranged in one-to-one correspondence with the first brackets (see the annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
543
513
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Re claim 7, the robot body comprises a housing and a chassis (see the annotated figure below), a top portion of the housing is provided with a receiving groove (61, figure 7), when the handrail body is in the second turning position, the handrail body and the connecting member are adapted to the receiving groove (as shown by figure 1, the handrail body and connecting member fit in the receiving groove), and the first bracket is mounted on the chassis and is provided in the housing (as detailed by figures 1 and 2).
PNG
media_image4.png
537
523
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Re claim 9, the handrail body is located in the receiving groove (as shown in figure 1), and top walls and side walls of the handrail body and the connecting member are coplanar with a surface of the housing (the top surface of the housing is coplanar with tip and side walls of the handrail body).
Re claim 10, a direction in which the handrail body and the connecting member are turned from the second turning position to the first turning position around the axis of the first shaft is opposite to the direction of forward movement of the robot body (since the robot can move in any direction, the direction of forward movement of the robot shown in the figures can be defined in the direction necessary to anticipate the claim language).
Re claim 11, the robot is a cleaning robot (see the Abstract).
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 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Juxing (Chinese Patent Publication CN212193157) in view of Wang (Chinese Patent Publication CN208773607).
Juxing discloses all the limitations of the claims, as applied above, except a display screen mounted on the handrail assembly, the housing comprises a positioning portion configured to support the display screen when the handrail body is located in the receiving groove.
Wang teaches a display screen (41, figure 1) mounted on a handrail assembly (40, figure 1), a housing (100, figure 1) comprises a positioning portion (the portion of 100 in which 41 fits in figure 1) configured to support the display screen when a handrail body is located in a receiving groove (42, see the machine translation which identifies 42 as a limit groove) .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a robot, such as that disclosed by Juxing, to have a display screen mounted on the handrail assembly, the housing comprises a positioning portion configured to support the display screen when the handrail body is located in the receiving groove, as taught by Wang, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a way for a user to operate and interact with the robot (see the machine translation of Wang which suggest this motivation in the second paragraph of the detailed description of the invention)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The primary reason for the indication of allowable subject matter in claim 3 is the inclusion in the claims of the limitations directed to a second shaft, a third shaft, a sliding rod, and a sliding tab, the sliding tab being driven to slide in a first groove and the sliding tab being configured to limit the hand rail body and the connecting member in the first turning position. Such limitations, in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claims, are not disclosed or suggested by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references all disclose handrail devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason S Morrow whose telephone number is (571)272-6663. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m..
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at (571) 270-5500. 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.
/JASON S MORROW/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
January 5, 2026