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 .
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.
Claim 7 is 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.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the end portion" in Line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-6, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuoka WO 2012/053416 (hereinafter Matsuoka) in view of Ishida US 2019/0217482 (hereinafter Ishida).
Re. Cl. 1, Matsuoka discloses: A gripping tool (Fig. 6) comprising: a plurality of clamping portions (14, 15, Fig. 6) for clamping an object (50, Fig. 5a-b), the plurality of clamping portions extending in an extending direction (see Fig. 6, vertically up and down), wherein each clamping portion of the plurality of clamping portions comprises: a clamping body (14b, 15b, Fig. 7b) having a clamping surface (14c, 15c, Fig. 7b) in planar to which a clamping direction for clamping the object crosses (see Fig. 6, horizontal direction between 14, 15 which crosses the vertical planar direction of 14b, 15b); a friction-holding elastic member (16a, Fig. 7b) disposed on the clamping surface of the clamping body (see Fig. 7b); and an elastic body (16b, Fig. 7b) disposed between the friction-holding elastic member and the clamping surface (see Fig. 7b, 16b is between portion 16c and 14/15c), and wherein the clamping portion has a deformation-restrictor (19, Fig. 7a-b) extending along opposite sides of the clamping surface (see Fig. 7b), the opposite sides being separate from each other in a width direction of the clamping surface (see 19a, and opposite side in Fig. 7a), the width direction crosses the extending direction of the clamping portion (see Fig. 7a), and the deformation-restrictor being configured to restrict, in the width direction, deformation of the elastic body (see Fig. 7a-b).
Re. Cl. 2, Matsuoka discloses: the clamping body is a rigid body (see Fig. 1-7b, rigid to grip 50 and to support 16).
Re. Cl. 3, Matsuoka discloses: the deformation-restrictor has a recessed portion (see Fig. 7a, portion of 19 which interacts with vertical 16d’s) , the recessed portion has a pair of inner wall surfaces facing each other in the width direction (see Fig. 7a), and wherein the elastic body is held with the pair of inner wall surfaces (see Fig. 7a).
Re. Cl. 4, Matsuoka discloses: the deformation-restrictor further has an additional pair of inner wall surfaces facing each other in a direction which crosses the direction in which the pair of inner wall surfaces face each other (see Fig. 7a, portion of 9 which interacts with horizontal 16d’s).
Re. Cl. 5, Matsuoka discloses: the friction-holding elastic member is deformable, depending upon the deformation of the elastic body (see Fig. 5a-b).
Re. Cl. 6, Matsuoka discloses: the friction-holding elastic member has an end portion extending more than the elastic body in the extending direction in which the clamping portion extends (see Fig. 7a-b, the portion 16a surrounds 16b).
Re. Cl. 12, Matsuoka discloses: the elastic body is greater in thickness than the friction-holding elastic member (see Fig. 7a-b, the thickness of 16b is greater than the thickness of 16a).
Re. Cl. 14, Matsuoka discloses: A gripping unit (Fig. 1) comprising: a gripping tool (2, Fig. 1-2a) comprising: a plurality of clamping portions (4, 5, Fig. 2) for clamping an object (see 50, Fig. 5a), the plurality of clamping portions extending in an extending direction (see Fig. 2, vertical direction), wherein each clamping portion of the plurality of clamping portions comprises: a clamping body (4b, 5b, Fig. 2a) having a clamping surface (4c, 5c, Fig. 2a) in planar to which a clamping direction for clamping the object crosses (see Fig. 2a, the surface 4c, 5c extends planar vertically in which clamping direction A-B crosses); a friction-holding elastic member (6a, Fig. 3a-b) disposed on the clamping surface of the clamping body (see Fig. 3a-b); and an elastic body (6b, Fig. 3b) disposed between the friction-holding elastic member and the clamping surface (see Fig. 3b), and wherein the clamping portion has a deformation-restrictor (9, Fig. 3a-b) extending along opposite sides of the clamping surface (see Fig. 3a, vertical sides of 9 extend on opposite sides of the surface 4c, 5c), the opposite sides being separate from each other in a width direction of the clamping surface (see Fig. 3a), the width direction crosses the extending direction of the clamping portion (see Fig. 3a-b), and the deformation-restrictor being configured to restrict, in the width direction, deformation of the elastic body (see Fig. 3a-b); and a clamping portion opening-closing portion (3, Fig. 2a) which opens and closes the plurality of clamping portions (see Fig. 2a, along lines A, B).
Re. Cls. 1 and 14, Matsuoka does not disclose the elastic body being lower in elastic modulus than the friction-holding elastic member (Cls. 1 and 14). Ishida discloses a similar gripping tool (Fig. 1) which includes a friction holding elastic member (10, Fig. 2) disposed on a clamping surface of a clamping body (30) and an elastic body (15, Fig. 2) disposed between the friction holding elastic member and the clamping surface (see Fig. 2), the elastic body being lower in elastic modulus than the friction holding elastic member (Paragraph 0024, silicone resin, rubber, or acrylic would have a higher elastic modulus than coffee beans, glass beads for instance).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Matsuoka device to use the materials disclosed by Ishida with reasonable expectation of success since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Please note that in the instant application, Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuoka in view of Ishida as applied to claims 1-6, 12 and 14 above, and further in view of Katayama JP 6883908 (hereinafter Katayama).
Re. Cls. 7-8, Matsuoka does not disclose the end portion of the clamping portion is tapered and decreases in width in the width direction and in thickness (Cl. 7) or the width of the end portion of the clamping portion is less than 20 mm (Cl. 8). Katayama discloses a gripping tool (Fig. 1) which includes clamping portions (14, 15, Fig. 1) which include end portions (see lower portions of 14, 15 where 27, 28 are) that are tapered and decrease in width in the width direction and in thickness (see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Matsuoka in view of Ishida device to have the tapered end portions of Katayama with reasonable expectation of success to provide a comparably thin tip of the gripper which can be used to push/manipulate objects along a surface or fit into comparatively small spaces.
Re. Cl. 8, the combination discussed above, discloses the claimed invention except the width being less than 20mm. As seen in Fig. 1 of Katayama, lower end of the grippers (14, 15) taper in width near the distalmost end of the gripper and as such the width is a result effective variable in that changing the width of the distal end changes the degree in which the tapering occurs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the device to have its width be less than 20mm as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Re. Cl. 9, the combination of Matsuoka, Ishida and Katayama would disclose the end portion has an elastic member (Matsuoka, 9 is disclosed as made of rubber see Page 41/45 of the attached translation) which is greater in elastic modulus than the elastic body (Paragraph 0024 of Ishida, the rubber disclosed in Matsuoka of the horizontal bottom portion of 9 would have a greater elastic modulus than glass beads or coffee beans).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuoka in view of Ishida as applied to claims 1-6, 12 and 14 above, and further in view of Hofmeister US 2013/0086732 (hereinafter Hofmeister).
Re. Cl. 13, the combination of Matsuoka in view of Ishida does not disclose the friction-holding elastic member has an embossed surface. Hofmeister discloses a gripping glove (Fig. 1) which includes a friction holding elastic member (2) which has an embossed surface (Paragraph 0006, Lines 9-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the friction holding elastic member of Matsuoka to include the embossed surface of Hofmeister with reasonable expectation of success since Hofmeister states that such a modification provides improved grip and also improves additionally the flexibility of the material (Paragraph 0006, Lines 9-11).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuoka in view of Ishida in view of Matsuoka US 2013/0310980 (hereinafter Matsuoka 980).
Re. Cl. 15, Matsuoka discloses: A handling system (Fig. 1) comprising a gripping tool (2, Fig. 1-2a) comprising: a plurality of clamping portions (4, 5, Fig. 2) for clamping an object (see 50, Fig. 5a), the plurality of clamping portions extending in an extending direction (see Fig. 2, vertical direction), wherein each clamping portion of the plurality of clamping portions comprises: a clamping body (4b, 5b, Fig. 2a) having a clamping surface (4c, 5c, Fig. 2a) in planar to which a clamping direction for clamping the object crosses (see Fig. 2a, the surface 4c, 5c extends planar vertically in which clamping direction A-B crosses); a friction-holding elastic member (6a, Fig. 3a-b) disposed on the clamping surface of the clamping body (see Fig. 3a-b); and an elastic body (6b, Fig. 3b) disposed between the friction-holding elastic member and the clamping surface (see Fig. 3b), and wherein the clamping portion has a deformation-restrictor (9, Fig. 3a-b) extending along opposite sides of the clamping surface (see Fig. 3a, vertical sides of 9 extend on opposite sides of the surface 4c, 5c), the opposite sides being separate from each other in a width direction of the clamping surface (see Fig. 3a), the width direction crosses the extending direction of the clamping portion (see Fig. 3a-b), and the deformation-restrictor being configured to restrict, in the width direction, deformation of the elastic body (see Fig. 3a-b).
Re. Cl. 15, Matsuoka does not disclose the elastic body being lower in elastic modulus than the friction-holding elastic member or an arm configured to be controllable by a controller, move the object while the gripping tool gripping the object. Ishida discloses a similar gripping tool (Fig. 1) which includes a friction holding elastic member (10, Fig. 2) disposed on a clamping surface of a clamping body (30) and an elastic body (15, Fig. 2) disposed between the friction holding elastic member and the clamping surface (see Fig. 2), the elastic body being lower in elastic modulus than the friction holding elastic member (Paragraph 0024, silicone resin, rubber, or acrylic would have a higher elastic modulus than coffee beans, glass beads for instance).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Matsuoka device to use the materials disclosed by Ishida with reasonable expectation of success since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Please note that in the instant application, Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Re. Cl. 15, Matsuoka in view of Ishida does not disclose an arm configured to be controllable by a controller, move the object while the gripping tool gripping the object. Matsuoka 980 discloses a handling system (Fig. 1a-b) which includes a gripping tool (2, Fig. 1a) and an arm (16, Fig. 1b) configured to be controllable by a controller (7, Fig. 1a-b), move the object while the gripping tool gripping the object (see Paragraph 0067).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Matsuoka in view of Ishida device to include an arm as disclosed by Matsuoka 980 with reasonable expectation of success since Matsuoka 980 states such a modification enables the object to be transferred to a predetermined space (Paragraph 0067). Such a modification would be useful in warehouses or assembly lines for instance so that a user does not have to transport the object.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Besch US 2006/0033350 and Slator US 4836064 disclose other known grippers which are presented to the Applicant for their consideration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E GARFT whose telephone number is (571)270-1171. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. to 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at (571)272-4797. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER GARFT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights