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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/22/2025 has been entered.
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 1,2, 5-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BlumenKanz [US Pat # 6,788,018] in view of Vassuer [US Pub # 2017/0082819].
Regarding claim 1: BlumenKranz shows a robotic system for use with a microscope, comprising: a base (63, see fig 10) supported by a floor; a support column (66); and a selective-compliance-articulated robot arm (61) (SCARA) connected to the base via the support column, including: a plurality of revolute joints (66, 68, 74) each having a respective axis of rotation that is perpendicular to the floor (see fig 10), the revolute joints including a first revolute joint (66), a second revolute joint (68), and a third revolute joint (74); a first link (64) connected to the base via the first revolute joint (66); a second link (65) connected to the first link (64) via the second revolute joint (68), having a distal end connected to the third revolute joint (74), and configured as a four-bar mechanism (“…The SCARA-style link 64 is pivotally mounted at its proximal end to base 63 by vertical axis pivot joint 66. The SCARA-style link 64 is pivotally mounted at its distal end to the proximal bracket 67 of parallelogram 65 by vertical axis pivot joint 68…”), and wherein the four- bar mechanism includes parallel horizontal links coupled to parallel vertical links (67, 71);, wherein none of the revolute joints of the SCARA functions in an anti- gravity mode such that the SCARA is configured, in the event of a power failure condition of the robotic system (“…The SCARA link 64 and the pivot 65 provide a broad range of horizontal motion, while being inherently balanced in that the axes of joints 66 and 68 are vertical and the applied gravitational loads are resisted by the SCARA link 64 as a cantilevered member...”), to support a full weight of the microscope (intended of use and functional language).
BlumenKranz does not explicitly disclose the robotic system use with a microscope and the second link is configured to connect to the microscope, and a linear actuator connected to the second link and configured to control vertical motion thereof. However, Vasseur shows the robotic system use with a microscope (100, see fig 1) and the second link (200) is configured to connect to the microscope, and a linear actuator (250) connected to the second link (200) and configured to control vertical motion thereof.
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the four-bar mechanism taught in BlumenKranz with linear actuator to control and the adjust precisely the movement of the second link It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided connected microscope or any other device (intend of use) to the second link to have the ability to adjust the position of the device.
Regarding claim 2, 5-7: BlumenKenz does not explicitly show an electronic control unit configured to provide electronic control signals to the linear actuator to control the vertical motion thereof. the microscope; and a bracket mounted to the distal end of the second link, wherein the microscope is mounted to the bracket.
wherein the base is positioned on the floor, and wherein the microscope has an optical head having a pitch axis arranged parallel to the floor.
wherein pitch and rotation of the optical head are selectively lockable.
Hoewever Vassuer shows an electronic control unit (ECU) configured to provide electronic control signals to the linear actuator to control the vertical motion thereof (see [0026]).
the microscope (120); and a bracket mounted (238) to the distal end of the second link, wherein the microscope is mounted to the bracket (see fig 1).
wherein the base (102) is positioned on the floor, and wherein the microscope (120) has an optical head having a pitch axis arranged parallel to the floor.
wherein pitch and rotation of the optical head (120) are selectively lockable ([0031]).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the device connected to the robot link with lockable features to position the device in a desired fix position. It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to provided the bour-bar with gas spring counterbalance provide adjustable, smooth force, which reduces motor strain and can improve robot stability.
Regarding claim 10: BlumenKenz shows a gas spring (72) counterbalance device operatively connected to the second link.
Claims 3, 4, 8, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BlumenKanz [US Pat # 6,788,018] in view of Vassuer [US Pub # 2017/0082819] in view of Ruiz [WO 2007/088206]
Regarding claim 3: BlumenKanz does not explicitly disclose a plurality of harmonic drive units, wherein at least one of the revolute joints of the SCARA is configured to be powered by a corresponding one of the harmonic drive units. However Ruiz teaches a harmonic drive unit wherein at least one of the revolute joints of the robot part is configured to be powered by a corresponding one of the harmonic drive units (“…the second (R) joint has a gear, preferably a harmonic drive gear, a motor, preferably a brushless servo-motor…”).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the joins taught in BlumenKanz reference with harmonic drive to have zero backlash and high precision.
Regarding claim 4: BlumenKanz does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the harmonic drive units is configured as a brushless DC motor. However Ruiz teaches wherein at least one of the harmonic drive units is configured as a brushless DC motor units (“…the second (R) joint has a gear, preferably a harmonic drive gear, a motor, preferably a brushless servo-motor…”).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the joins taught in BlumenKanz reference with brushless DC motor to have higher efficiency and smoother operation.
Regarding claim 8: BlumenKanz does not explicitly disclose a position sensor connected to the optical head and in communication with an electronic control unit (ECU) However Ruiz teaches a position sensor (“… an absolute position sensor coupled to the output stage of the gear…”)
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the robotic system taught in BlumenKanz with position sensor to track the position of the optical head and adjust the position when it is necessary.
Regarding claim 9: BlumenKanz does not show the linear actuator includes a non-back drivable vertical harmonic drive unit. However Vasseur shows wherein the linear actuator includes a non-back drivable (“…An electromagnetic clutch allows lead screw rotation when an electrical voltage is applied thereto.) Vasseur does not disclose the harmonic drive unit, However Ruiz teaches wherein at least one of the harmonic drive units (“…the second (R) joint has a gear, preferably a harmonic drive gear, a motor, preferably a brushless servo-motor…”).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the joins taught in BlumenKanz reference with non-back drivable drive to reduce backlash and increase precision.
Regarding claim 11: BlumenKanz does not explicitly disclose wherein the first link and the second link are constructed of aluminum and beryllium. However it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have made the robot links from aluminum or any other appropriate material such aluminum or any other material as matter of design choice.
Claims 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BlumenKanz [US Pat # 6,788,018] in view of Vasseur [US Pub # 2017/0082819] in view of Ruiz [WO 2007/088206]
Regarding claim 12: BlumenKanz show a selective-compliance-articulated robot arm (SCARA) and a base (63, see fig 10), the SCARA comprising: a plurality of revolute joints (66, 68, 74), including a first revolute joint (66), a second revolute joint (68), and a third revolute joint (74) each having a respective axis of rotation that is perpendicular to the floor; a first link (66) connectable to the base via the first revolute joint, the base (63) being supported by a floor; a second link (65) connected to the first link (64) via the second revolute joint (68), the second link (65) having a distal end connected to the third revolute joint (74), wherein the second link (65) is a four-bar mechanism, and wherein the four-bar mechanism includes parallel horizontal links coupled to parallel vertical links; and wherein none of the revolute joints of the SCARA functions in an anti-gravity mode such that the SCARA is configured, in the event of a power failure condition of the robotic system (“…The SCARA link 64 and the pivot 65 provide a broad range of horizontal motion, while being inherently balanced in that the axes of joints 66 and 68 are vertical and the applied gravitational loads are resisted by the SCARA link 64 as a cantilevered member...”), to support a full weight of the microscope.
BlumenKanz does not show wherein the second link is configured to connect to the microscope, a linear actuator connected to the second link and configured to control vertical motion thereof in response to electronic control signals from an electronic control unit (ECU),
However, Vasseur shows the robotic system use with a microscope (100, see fig 1) and the second link (200) is configured to connect to the microscope, and a linear actuator (250) connected to the second link (200) and configured to control vertical motion thereof.
BlumenKanz and Vassuer do not show the linear actuator includes a non-back drivable vertical harmonic drive unit. However Ruiz teaches wherein at least one of the harmonic drive units (“…the second (R) joint has a gear, preferably a harmonic drive gear, a motor, preferably a brushless servo-motor…”).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the joins taught in BlumenKanz reference with Harmonic drive to increase its precision and reduce backlash.
Regarding claim 13: BlumenKanz does not explicitly disclose a harmonic drive unit, wherein at least one of the revolute joints of the SCARA is powered by the harmonic drive unit. However, Ruiz teaches a harmonic drive unit, wherein at least one of the revolute joints of the SCARA is powered by the harmonic drive unit. (“…the second (R) joint has a gear, preferably a harmonic drive gear, a motor, preferably a brushless servo-motor…”).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the joins taught in BlumenKanz reference with harmonic drive to have zero backlash and high precision.
Regarding claim 14: BlumenKanz does not explicitly disclose a plurality of harmonic drive units, wherein at least one of the revolute joints of the SCARA is configured to be powered by a corresponding one of the harmonic drive units. However Ruiz teaches a harmonic drive unit wherein at least one of the revolute joints of the robot part is configured to be powered by a corresponding one of the harmonic drive units (“…the second (R) joint has a gear, preferably a harmonic drive gear, a motor, preferably a brushless servo-motor…”).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the joins taught in BlumenKanz reference with harmonic drive to have zero backlash and high precision.
Regarding claim 15-17: BlumenKanz does not explicitly a bracket mounted to the distal end of the second link, wherein the microscope is mounted to the bracket, wherein the microscope is a digital or analog ophthalmic microscope having an optical head (see abstract).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the device with bracket to securely fix microscope.
Regarding claim 18: BlumenKanz does not explicitly disclose a position sensor connected to the optical head and in communication with an electronic control unit (ECU) However Ruiz teaches a position sensor (“… an absolute position sensor coupled to the output stage of the gear…”)
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the robotic system taught in BlumenKanz with position sensor to track the position of the optical head and adjust the position when it is necessary.
Regarding claim 19: BlumenKanz shows a gas spring (72) counterbalance device operatively connected to the second link.
Regarding claim 20: BlumenKenz shows A robotic system, comprising: ;a base (63) supported by a floor; a support column connected to the base;; and a selective-compliance-articulated robot arm (SCARA) connected to the base via the support column, the SCARA including: a plurality of revolute joints (66, 68, 74), the revolute joints (66, 68, 74) including a first revolute joint, a second revolute joint, and a third revolute joint each having a respective axis of rotation that is perpendicular to the floor; a first link (64) connected to the base (63) via the first revolute joint; a second link (65) connected to the first link (64) via the second revolute joint (68), having a distal end connected to the third revolute joint (74), and configured as a four-bar mechanism (“…The SCARA-style link 64 is pivotally mounted at its proximal end to base 63 by vertical axis pivot joint 66. The SCARA-style link 64 is pivotally mounted at its distal end to the proximal bracket 67 of parallelogram 65 by vertical axis pivot joint 68…”), and wherein the four-bar mechanism includes parallel horizontal links coupled to parallel vertical links (see fig) ; a gas spring counterbalance device (72) operatively connected to the second link;
wherein none of the revolute joints of the SCARA function in an anti-gravity mode such that the SCARA is configured, in the event of a power failure condition of the robotic system (“…The SCARA link 64 and the pivot 65 provide a broad range of horizontal motion, while being inherently balanced in that the axes of joints 66 and 68 are vertical and the applied gravitational loads are resisted by the SCARA link 64 as a cantilevered member...”),, to support a full weight of the microscope (intend of use)
BlumenKranz does not explicitly show an ophthalmic microscope; a bracket mounted to the ophthalmic microscope, an electronic control unit (ECU) configured to output electronic control signals, the plurality of revolute joints powered by one or more harmonic drive units, wherein the second link is connectable to the microscope via the bracket,
and a linear actuator connected to the second link and configured to control vertical motion thereof in response to the electronic control signals.
However, Vasseur shows the robotic system use with a microscope (100, see fig 1) and the second link (200) is configured to connect to the microscope, an electronic control unit (ECU) configured to output electronic control signals wherein the second link is connectable to the microscope via the bracket (238),
and a linear actuator (250) connected to the second link and configured to control vertical motion thereof in response to the electronic control signals
BlumenKranz and Vasseur do not the plurality of revolute joints powered by one or more harmonic drive units. However Ruiz teaches wherein at least one of the harmonic drive units (“…the second (R) joint has a gear, preferably a harmonic drive gear, a motor, preferably a brushless servo-motor…”).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the joins taught in BlumenKanz reference with Harmonic drive to increase its precision and reduce backlash.
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided the four-bar mechanism taught in BlumenKranz with linear actuator to control and the adjust precisely the movement of the second link It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have provided connected microscope or any other device (intend of use) to the second link to have the ability to adjust the position of the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAKARIA ELAHMADI whose telephone number is (571)270-5324. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10-6 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minnah Seoh can be reached on 571-270-7778. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/ZAKARIA ELAHMADI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3618