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.
Claims 1-13, 15, and 19-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the first link" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 2-13 are rejected for being dependent from rejected claim 1.
Claims 8, 13, 15, and 19-20 recite the limitations "the first portion" and “the second portion”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
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 1-6 and 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hurst (WO 2020/176542).
In re claim 1, Hurst discloses a legged robot (100) for traversing a terrain, comprising:
a robot body (105);
at least two legs, each leg comprising a plurality of links (unnumbered links between hip 130, knee 135, ankle 140, and foot assembly 120/410/510 as shown in Figures 1, 4, and 5) connected in end to end fashion, the plurality of links comprising at least a proximal link (link between hip 130 and knee 135) and a distal link (link between ankle 140 and foot assembly 120/410/510), the proximal link having a first end rotatably connected to the body and a second end (see [0030] and [0043]-[0050]);
a foot assembly (510), rotatably disposed on a distal end of the distal link of each leg, the foot assembly comprising a first foot portion (535) and a second foot portion (545) for making contact with the terrain;
a first leg actuator (actuator in hip 130), disposed on one of the body and the first link (as shown in Figure 1), configured to rotate the proximal link about the first end (see [0030]);
a second leg actuator (actuator in knee 135), disposed on the proximal link, configured to rotate an adjacent link (link between knee 135 and ankle 140 OR the link between the ankle 140 and foot assembly 120) relative to the first link, wherein the second leg actuator is operable to extend and retract the leg along a leg length direction (see [0030]); and
a first foot actuator (actuator on upper end of linkage 465 as shown in Figure 4) mounted on one or more of the links, operable upon the foot assembly (see [0050]) wherein contact by the first foot portion with the terrain, when the robot takes a step, causes the first foot actuator to reduce a vertical velocity associated with the distal end of the distal link to substantially zero as the second foot portion initially touches the terrain (see [0043]);
wherein the distal end of the distal link has zero vertical velocity after the second foot portion reaches the terrain and one or more of the first foot portion and the second foot portion remains securely in contact with the terrain during a remaining portion of the step (see [0008]-[0009]).
In re claim 2, Hurst further discloses wherein the adjacent link (link between the ankle 140 and foot assembly 120) is the distal link as shown in Figure 1.
In re claim 3, Hurst further discloses wherein the adjacent link (link between knee 135 and ankle 140) is an intermediate link (link between knee 135 and ankle 140 as shown in Figure 1) that is rotatably disposed on the second end of the proximal link and extends to a first rotatable connection point on the distal link.
In re claim 4, Hurst further discloses wherein the distal link comprises an extension (unnumbered extension below linkage 460 as shown in Figure 4) that extends a distance beyond the first rotatable connection point, the leg further comprising a connecting rod (460) connecting the proximal link with the extension at the distance to establish a four bar linkage comprising the proximal link, the intermediate link, the extension, and the connecting rod (as shown in Figure 4).
In re claim 5, Hurst further discloses wherein the first foot actuator is disposed on one of the intermediate link and the distal link and a connecting rod (465) connects the first foot actuator to the foot assembly (as shown in Figure 4).
In re claim 6, Hurst further discloses further comprising a compliant element (torsional spring connecting third portion 520 to foot assembly 530; see [0044]) disposed in series with the first foot actuator and the foot assembly.
In re claim 8, Hurst further discloses wherein the foot assembly further comprises a material disposed on the bottom surface (portion 520 is constructed with a compliant foam; see [0045]), the material having a first compliance at the first portion (thinner portion of 520) and a second compliance at the second portion (thicker portion of 520), the first compliance being greater than the second compliance (due to thickness of foam). The Examiner notes that “a first portion” and “a second portion” were not claimed (see 112 rejection above) so it is unclear where these portions are located.
In re claim 9, Hurst further discloses wherein the foot assembly further comprises a third foot portion (520) rotatably disposed on the first foot portion with a torsional spring (not shown; see [0044]) whereby contact of the third foot portion with the terrain activates the torsional spring to reduce a vertical velocity of the first foot portion before it touches the terrain (see [0044]).
In re claim 10, Hurst further discloses wherein the third foot portion has a lower effective inertia when it initially touches the terrain than the first foot portion when it initially touches the terrain (see [0010]).
In re claim 11, Hurst further discloses wherein the first foot portion (535) has a lower effective inertia when it initially touches the terrain than the second foot portion (545) when it initially touches the terrain (see [0009]).
In re claim 12, Hurst further discloses wherein the foot assembly is constructed so that the first foot portion contacts the terrain before the second foot portion when the robot takes a step (as shown in Figures 5A-5C; see [0044]).
In re claim 13, Hurst further discloses wherein the second portion of the foot assembly includes one or more distal surfaces that engage with the terrain (entire bottom surface engages the terrain as shown in Figures 5C; see [0044]).
In re claim 14, Hurst discloses a method of managing forces experienced by a legged robot (100) when taking a step on a terrain comprising: providing a leg (400) having a distal end (lower end) and a foot assembly (410) pivotally attached to the distal end, the foot assembly comprising a first foot portion (535) and a second foot portion (545), the first foot portion having a lower effective inertia than the second foot portion (see [0009]); controlling the approach of the foot assembly as it nears the terrain during the step (620 as shown in Figure 6), contacting the terrain with the first foot portion (630 as shown in Figure 6); reducing the vertical velocity relative to the terrain of the second foot portion (640 as shown in Figure 6); and contacting the terrain with the second foot portion (see [0056]).
In re claim 15, Hurst further discloses further comprising maintaining rigid contact between the foot assembly and the terrain after the second portion contacts the terrain and through a remaining portion of the step (see [0056]).
In re claim 16, Hurst further discloses further comprising controlling forces applied to the terrain through one or both of the first foot portion and the second foot portion for the remainder of contact with the terrain (see [0053]).
In re claim 17, Hurst further discloses wherein the vertical velocity relative to the terrain of the second foot portion is reduced to substantially zero before it makes contact with the terrain (see [0043]).
In re claim 18, Hurst further discloses further comprising reducing the vertical velocity relative to the terrain of the first foot portion prior to contacting the terrain (see [0044]).
In re claim 19, Hurst further discloses wherein the foot assembly comprises a third foot portion that reduces the vertical velocity of the first portion (see [0044]).
In re claim 20, Hurst further discloses wherein the foot assembly further comprises a third foot portion (520), the method further comprising providing a third foot portion to the foot assembly, the third foot portion having a lower effective inertia than the first portion (see [0010]); contacting the terrain with the third foot portion prior to the first foot portion (see [0044]); and reducing a vertical velocity of the first foot portion before it makes contact with the terrain (see [0044]).
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hurst.
In re claim 7, Hurst further comprises wherein the foot assembly further comprises a compliant material (foam covering portion 520, not shown; see [0044]), but does not specifically disclose being disposed on a bottom surface of at least the first foot portion of the foot assembly whereby the compliant material reduces a vertical velocity of the first foot portion as it initially touches the terrain. Hurst, however, does disclose that additional embodiments may comprise additional portions and corresponding connectivity engaged compliant elements, with descending effective inertia, to create a force ramp that is as smooth as possible (see [0048]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the foot of Hurst such that it comprised the compliant material on the bottom of the foot to advantageously create a force ramp that is as smooth as possible.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The references cited on the attached PTO-892 teach walking robots of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael R Stabley whose telephone number is (571)270-3249. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5:30.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached on (571) 272-6265. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL R STABLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611