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 .
Response to Amendments
The amendment and response filed on January 21, 2026, to the Non-Final Office Action dated October 21, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1 - 20 are pending in this application.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 21, 2026, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, see pages 5-10, filed January 21, 2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection based on Maeland GUNNAR (WO-2022190012-A1), Carl-Johan Hjerpe (US-9657589-B2), Garman et al (US-6626195-B1) have been considered but are not persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1-20 is maintained for the reasons explained below.
Applicant’s central arguments is that the applied prior art fails to show all the elements of at least claim 1. The claims are more broadly claimed than how applicant interprets them, so that a broader but reasonable interpretation, as has been done by the rejection, does not necessitate such requirement as applicant argued. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims.
To the extent that Applicant argues that the GUNNAR reference fails to teach that the "first end" is a component of the wrist joint, Applicant is advised that the grounds of rejection are based upon the combined teachings of GUNNAR in view of Hjerpe under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). It follows therefore, in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F. 2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck& Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
As can be seen below Figure 4 , GUNNER, shows the elements of the claims: Gantry 30 has arms 32 with multiple tools (39) that can pivot to different cleaning positions. The lower portion of arms 32 consisting of elements 36, and 39 represent the claimed tool and member 34 and the like is the first end keeping the elements secured to the gantry so that it can move vertically and pivot to desired positions. As stated in the rejection all elements that are coupled to element 34 through gantry 31 such as frames 20, 30, and 40 are part of the first end to secure the tools and to distinguish it from the second end that holds the sprayers and the like. The rejection of 10/21/2025 is merely asserting that substituting a wrist joint as disclosed by Hjerpe would be advantages in Gunner to get to those hard to reach places such as inside the engine and the like.
PNG
media_image1.png
320
538
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Thus, the claims are more broadly claimed than how applicant interprets them and applicant's argument is not deemed persuasive to overcome the rejection, and the rejection is maintained.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 & 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeland GUNNAR (WO-2022190012-A1)(“Gunnar”), applicant’s submitted IDS document, and Carl-Johan Hjerpe (US-9657589-B2)(“Hjerpe”).
As per claim 1, Gunner discloses a system that performs ground operations for a vehicle (Figure 2), the system comprising:
a robotic arm with a (see at least para. [0055] and figure 3, disclose each frame comprises one or more telescopic arm 32 adapted to vertically move a transversal member 34 closer to the aircraft 50….. The vertical telescopic arms 32 are downwardly attached to the frame 31. A transversal member 34 is attached to two or more telescoping arms 32 as to be maintained close to the aircraft 50) comprising:
a first end coupled to the robotic arm (see at least [0062] and figure 14, disclose the position detecting system 220 may be affixed to one of the frames 20, 30, and 40, to the roof of the hangar 100);
a second end coupled to the tool (See at least abstract that discloses nozzles attached to the tool:” structure of the one or more gantries is essentially made of telescopic arms allowing more flexibility on the positioning of nozzle clusters during the washing and de-icing process”.); and
a tool motor coupled to the second end and configured to rotate the tool relative to the wrist joint about a tool axis, wherein the tool motor rotates with the tool about the tool axis (See at least Para. [0058] disclosing rotation of the tool:” the nozzle clusters 37 and engines 36 are adapted to rotate in any direction and to rapidly sweep the surface of the aircraft, back and forth as the aircraft 50 moves under the transversal member or arm 34. The telescopic arms 32 and telescopic transversal member 34 are extended or collapsed using any mean known in the art such as actuators, hydraulic system or electric motors coupled to a gear.”).
Gunnar does not disclose a wrist at the end of the arm.
Hjerpe in the same field of endeavor discloses a wash system that includes a wash unit associated with a mobile unit for providing wash fluid, one or more nozzles for streamline injecting wash fluid provided by the wash unit directly into an engine inlet, and an articulating arm for use in positioning the one or more nozzles. See Abstract and Figures 3 & 5.
In particular, Hjerpe discloses robotic arm with a wrist joint rotationally coupled at one end (Hjerpe at Column 6, Lines 59-62, discloses a wrist joint at the end of the robot arm:” Robotic arm 34 has at least one articulated joint and a wrist enabling appropriate positioning of spray head 33 in inlet 301 of engine 1. The robotic arm is moveable with at least three degrees of freedom.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the pivot mechanism at the end of a robot arm taught in Hjerpe in the washing and de-icing apparatus in Gunner with a reasonable expectation of success because this results in a washing and de-icing apparatus that is flexible and able to reach occluded spaces in an engine compartment which increases the lifetime of the airplane being serviced (see Hjerpe at Column 1, Lines 45-56.).
As per claim 10, Gunnar discloses a method for performing operations on a vehicle (Figure 15), the method comprising:
rotationally coupling one end of a (see at least para. [0055] and figure 3, disclose each frame comprises one or more telescopic arm 32 adapted to vertically move a transversal member 34 closer to the aircraft 50….. The vertical telescopic arms 32 are downwardly attached to the frame 31. A transversal member 34 is attached to two or more telescoping arms 32 as to be maintained close to the aircraft 50);
coupling a tool to an opposite end of the wrist joint (See at least abstract that discloses nozzles attached to the tool:” structure of the one or more gantries is essentially made of telescopic arms allowing more flexibility on the positioning of nozzle clusters during the washing and de-icing process”.);
rotating, via a tool motor, the tool relative to the wrist joint about a tool axis (See at least Para. [0058] disclosing rotation of the tool:” the nozzle clusters 37 and engines 36 are adapted to rotate in any direction and to rapidly sweep the surface of the aircraft, back and forth as the aircraft 50 moves under the transversal member or arm 34. The telescopic arms 32 and telescopic transversal member 34 are extended or collapsed using any mean known in the art such as actuators, hydraulic system or electric motors coupled to a gear.”); and
rotating the tool motor with the tool about the tool axis (See at least Para. [0058] disclosing rotation about axis for the nozzle/tool at the end of the robotic arm:” the nozzle clusters 37 and engines 36 are adapted to rotate in any direction and to rapidly sweep the surface of the aircraft, back and forth as the aircraft 50 moves under the transversal member or arm 34.”).
Gunnar does not disclose a wrist at the end of the arm.
Hjerpe in the same field of endeavor discloses a wash system that includes a wash unit associated with a mobile unit for providing wash fluid, one or more nozzles for streamline injecting wash fluid provided by the wash unit directly into an engine inlet, and an articulating arm for use in positioning the one or more nozzles. See Abstract and Figures 3 & 5.
In particular, Hjerpe discloses a wrist joint [at] an end of a robotic arm (Hjerpe at Column 6, Lines 59-62, discloses a wrist joint at the end of the robot arm:” Robotic arm 34 has at least one articulated joint and a wrist enabling appropriate positioning of spray head 33 in inlet 301 of engine 1. The robotic arm is moveable with at least three degrees of freedom.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the pivot mechanism at the end of a robot arm taught in Hjerpe in the washing and de-icing apparatus in Gunner with a reasonable expectation of success because this results in a washing and de-icing apparatus that is flexible and able to reach occluded spaces in an engine compartment which increases the lifetime of the airplane being serviced (see Hjerpe at Column 1, Lines 45-56.).
Claims 2-9 and 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gunnar and Hjerpe as applied to claims 1 & 10 above, and further in view of Garman et al (US-6626195-B1)(“Garman”).
As per claim 2, Gunnar and Hjerpe disclose system of claim 1.
Gunnar and Hjerpe do not disclose a plurality of hoses and a center hose extending through an interior space of the wrist joint from the first end to the second end, with the plurality of hoses helically wrapped around the center hose.
Garman discloses an assembly for rotating and axially directing a high pressure spray hose and spray head to clean residue from a surface. See Abstract and Figures 1-2.
In Particular Garman discloses a plurality of hoses and a center hose extending through an interior space of the wrist joint from the first end to the second end, with the plurality of hoses helically wrapped around the center hose (Garman at Column 6, Lines 25-32, discloses an assembly for accommodating a plurality of hoses:” reel assembly 120 that can be adjusted with relative ease to accommodate hoses 16 of different diameter and length. The reel assembly 120 provides a base 122 that is defined by a number of annular bands 124 and a center collar piece 126 that mounts to the axle 42. A number of inner and outer cage bands 127 and 128 are vertically offset from the base 122.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the hose assembly of Garman in the de-icing apparatus in Gunner as modified by Hjerpe with a reasonable expectation of success because this results in an apparatus that can accommodate hoses of various sizes when performing washing or de-icing operations where cleaning time can be reduced and equipment operation improved by coupling the several assemblies to the single line (see Garman column 5, lines 32-34).
As per claim 3, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a system of claim 2, further comprising a hose motor coupled to the first end of the wrist joint and configured to rotate the plurality of hoses and the center hose about a hose axis at the first end, wherein the plurality of hoses and the center hose rotate about the hose axis relative to the robotic arm (Garman at Column 2, Line 66 to Column 3, Lines 1-2, discloses a motor to maintain the hoses coiled to a central axis:” hose drive is coupled to a hose collection reel via a motor driven reel axle. A layering arm extends from the axle and directs the hose onto an adjustable hub at the reel. The hose is preferably stacked in a single layer.”).
As per claim 4, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a system of claim 3, wherein the tool motor is configured to rotate the plurality of hoses and the center hose about the tool axis at the second end (Garman at Column 4, Lines 17-22, discloses rotating a hose around a tool axis:” hollow stub axle 40 and a partially hollow drive axle 42 are contained by the bearings 38 and permit rotation of a coupled axial hose drive assembly 44 and the hose reel 20. The horizontal spacing between and vertical offset of the stanchions 32-36 can be adjusted depending upon the size and length of hose 18 that is being deployed.”).
As per claim 5, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a system of claim 4, wherein the hose motor and the tool motor cooperate with each other to rotate the plurality of hoses and the center hose relative to the robotic arm as the tool is rotated by the tool motor, regardless of a relative angle between the tool axis and the hose axis (Garman at Column 5, Lines 31-37, discloses cooperation between the reeling operation of the hose and the tool:” jobs requiring multiple assemblies 10, cleaning time can be reduced and equipment operation improved by coupling the several assemblies 10 to the single air supply 69 and operating the assemblies 10 in complementary fashion. That is, as the hose 18 of one assembly 10 is directed in a cleaning stroke, the hose 18 of another assembly 10 is collected.”).
As per claim 6, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a system of claim 5, wherein the wrist joint comprises multiple wedged segments with each adjacent wedged segment being rotationally coupled to each other, and wherein the wrist joint rotates the multiple wedged segments and angles the tool axis relative to the hose axis to an angle in a range from “0” zero degrees to 140 degrees (Hjerpe at Column 6, Lines 59-62, discloses at least three degrees of freedom to select a spraying pattern:” Robotic arm 34 has at least one articulated joint and a wrist enabling appropriate positioning of spray head 33 in inlet 301 of engine 1. The robotic arm is moveable with at least three degrees of freedom.” The claimed range of “0” to 140 degree is a changes in size/range that is generally not given patentable weight, unless such a change leads to unobvious results. See In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA).).
As per claim 7, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a system of claim 5, wherein the wrist joint comprises multiple wedged segments with each adjacent wedged segment being rotationally coupled to each other, and wherein the wrist joint rotates the multiple wedged segments and angles the tool axis relative to the hose axis to an angle in a range from “0” zero degrees to 120 degrees (Hjerpe at Column 6, Lines 59-62, discloses at least three degrees of freedom to select a spraying pattern:” Robotic arm 34 has at least one articulated joint and a wrist enabling appropriate positioning of spray head 33 in inlet 301 of engine 1. The robotic arm is moveable with at least three degrees of freedom.” The claimed range of “0” to 140 degree is a changes in size/range that is generally not given patentable weight, unless such a change leads to unobvious results. See In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA).).
As per claim 8, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a system of claim 7, wherein the wrist joint further comprises a first drive gear and a second drive gear positioned at the first end of the wrist joint, and wherein independent rotation of the first drive gear and the second drive gear rotates the multiple wedge segments to change the angle of the tool axis relative to the hose axis (Hjerpe at Figure 5 and Column 7, Lines 43-51, discloses various gearing mechanism to change the orientation of the nozzle:” Spray head 33 comprises of a unit with essentially rotational symmetry with axis 501 being the centre of symmetry. When spray head 33 is in position for washing axis 501 is essentially aligned with the engine shaft centre of symmetry. Spray head 33 has a central body 50. Body 50 has a front end 58 faced towards the engine. Body 50 has a rear end 59 opposite to front end 58. Rear end 59 is connected to robotic arm 34.”).
As per claim 9, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a system of claim 8, wherein the vehicle comprises an aircraft, a space vehicle, a boat, a ship, a bus, a truck, an 18-wheeler transport, a train car, a train engine, a trolley car, or a car (Gunner at Para. [0064] discloses application to objects such as:” contour of large objects, such as aircraft or other vehicles.”).
As per claim 11, Gunner and Hjerpe disclose a method of claim 10, further comprising:
Gunnar and Hjerpe do not disclose extending a plurality of hoses and a center hose through an interior space of the wrist joint from a first end of the wrist joint to a second end of the wrist joint; and
Gunnar and Hjerpe do not disclose helically wrapping the plurality of hoses around the center hose.
Garman discloses an assembly for rotating and axially directing a high pressure spray hose and spray head to clean residue from a surface. See Abstract and Figures 1-2.
In particular, Garman discloses extending a plurality of hoses and a center hose through an interior space of the wrist joint from a first end of the wrist joint to a second end of the wrist joint (Garman at Column 6, Lines 25-32, discloses an assembly for accommodating a plurality of hoses:” reel assembly 120 that can be adjusted with relative ease to accommodate hoses 16 of different diameter and length. The reel assembly 120 provides a base 122 that is defined by a number of annular bands 124 and a center collar piece 126 that mounts to the axle 42. A number of inner and outer cage bands 127 and 128 are vertically offset from the base 122.”).
Garman discloses helically wrapping the plurality of hoses around the center hose (Garman at Column4, Lines 42-47, discloses wrapping the hoses relative to an arbitrary axis :” assemblies 20, 24 and 44 are concentrically aligned to the center longitudinal drive axis of the assembly 10 and relative to which the hose 18 is particularly coaxially and concentrically aligned. Hose movement is thus balanced to the drive axis and the enhanced operating speeds are possible.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the hose assembly of Garman in the de-icing apparatus in Gunner as modified by Hjerpe with a reasonable expectation of success because this results in an apparatus that can accommodate hoses of various sizes when performing washing or de-icing operations where cleaning time can be reduced and equipment operation improved by coupling the several assemblies to the single line (see Garman column 5, lines 32-34).
As per claim 12, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a method of claim 11, further comprising:
coupling a hose motor to an upper segment of the robotic arm (Hjerpe at Column 7, Lines 8-13, discloses coupling a source hose to the upper part of the robotic arm:” Wash unit 31 delivers the pressurized wash liquid to spray head 33 via conduit 35 where conduit 35 comprises of a flex hose or similar device for that service. In spray head 33 the liquid is distributed to a multiple of nozzles via manifold 36 where the nozzles have the purpose of injecting the wash liquid into the engine.”);
rotating the plurality of hoses and the center hose around a hose axis by operating the hose motor (Garman at Column 2, Line 66 to Column 3, Lines 1-2, discloses a motor to maintain the hoses coiled to a central axis:” hose drive is coupled to a hose collection reel via a motor driven reel axle. A layering arm extends from the axle and directs the hose onto an adjustable hub at the reel. The hose is preferably stacked in a single layer.”); and
rotating the plurality of hoses and the center hose relative to the upper segment (Gunner at least Para. [0058] disclosing rotation about axis for the nozzle/tool at the end of the robotic arm:” the nozzle clusters 37 and engines 36 are adapted to rotate in any direction and to rapidly sweep the surface of the aircraft, back and forth as the aircraft 50 moves under the transversal member or arm 34.”).
As per claim 13, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a method of claim 12, further comprising:
coupling a tool motor at the second end of the wrist joint (Gunner at abstract that discloses nozzles attached to the tool:” structure of the one or more gantries is essentially made of telescopic arms allowing more flexibility on the positioning of nozzle clusters during the washing and de-icing process”.); and
rotating, with the tool, the plurality of hoses and the center hose around a tool axis at the second end by operating the hose motor (Garman at Column 4, Lines 17-22, discloses rotating a hose around a tool axis:” hollow stub axle 40 and a partially hollow drive axle 42 are contained by the bearings 38 and permit rotation of a coupled axial hose drive assembly 44 and the hose reel 20. The horizontal spacing between and vertical offset of the stanchions 32-36 can be adjusted depending upon the size and length of hose 18 that is being deployed.”).
As per claim 14, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a method of claim 13, further comprising:
rotating the hose motor in cooperation with the tool motor to rotate the plurality of hoses and the center hose relative to the robotic arm as the tool is rotated by the tool motor, regardless of a relative angle between the tool axis and the hose axis (Hjerpe at Column 6, Lines 59-62, discloses a wrist joint at the end of the robot arm:” Robotic arm 34 has at least one articulated joint and a wrist enabling appropriate positioning of spray head 33 in inlet 301 of engine 1. The robotic arm is moveable with at least three degrees of freedom.”).
As per claim 15, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a method of claim 14, further comprising angling the tool axis relative to the hose axis by rotating multiple wedge segments of the wrist joint relative to each other, thereby angling tool axis relative to the hose axis to an angle in a range from “0” zero degrees to 140 degrees (Hjerpe at Column 6, Lines 59-62, discloses at least three degrees of freedom to select a spraying pattern:” Robotic arm 34 has at least one articulated joint and a wrist enabling appropriate positioning of spray head 33 in inlet 301 of engine 1. The robotic arm is moveable with at least three degrees of freedom.” The claimed range of “0” to 140 degree is a changes in size/range that is generally not given patentable weight, unless such a change leads to unobvious results. See In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA).).
As per claim 16, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a method of claim 15, further comprising angling the tool axis relative to the hose axis to an angle in a range from “0” zero degrees to 120 degrees (Hjerpe at Column 6, Lines 59-62, discloses at least three degrees of freedom to select a spraying pattern:” Robotic arm 34 has at least one articulated joint and a wrist enabling appropriate positioning of spray head 33 in inlet 301 of engine 1. The robotic arm is moveable with at least three degrees of freedom.” The claimed range of “0” to 140 degree is a changes in size/range that is generally not given patentable weight, unless such a change leads to unobvious results. See In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA).).
As per claim 17, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a method of claim 16, further comprising rotating the multiple wedge segments of the wrist joint relative to each other by independently rotating a first drive gear and a second drive gear positioned at the first end of the wrist joint (Hjerpe at Figure 5 and Column 7, Lines 43-51, discloses various gearing mechanism to change the orientation of the nozzle:” Spray head 33 comprises of a unit with essentially rotational symmetry with axis 501 being the centre of symmetry. When spray head 33 is in position for washing axis 501 is essentially aligned with the engine shaft centre of symmetry. Spray head 33 has a central body 50. Body 50 has a front end 58 faced towards the engine. Body 50 has a rear end 59 opposite to front end 58. Rear end 59 is connected to robotic arm 34.”).
As per claim 18, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a method of claim 10, further comprising manipulating the tool via the wrist joint and the robotic arm during a ground operation for the vehicle (Hjerpe at Column 6, Lines 59-62, discloses a wrist joint at the end of the robot arm:” Robotic arm 34 has at least one articulated joint and a wrist enabling appropriate positioning of spray head 33 in inlet 301 of engine 1. The robotic arm is moveable with at least three degrees of freedom.”).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeland GUNNAR (WO-2022190012-A1)(“Gunnar”), applicant’s submitted IDS document, Carl-Johan Hjerpe (US-9657589-B2)(“Hjerpe”), and further in view of Garman et al (US-6626195-B1)(“Garman”).
As per claim 19, Gunner discloses wrist joint for a robotic arm that performs operations on an vehicle , the wrist joint comprising:
(Gunner at Para. [0055] and figure 3, disclose each frame comprises one or more telescopic arm 32 adapted to vertically move a transversal member 34 closer to the aircraft 50….. The vertical telescopic arms 32 are downwardly attached to the frame 31. A transversal member 34 is attached to two or more telescoping arms 32 as to be maintained close to the aircraft 50);
Gunnar does not disclose a wrist at the end of the arm.
Hjerpe in the same field of endeavor discloses a wash system that includes a wash unit associated with a mobile unit for providing wash fluid, one or more nozzles for streamline injecting wash fluid provided by the wash unit directly into an engine inlet, and an articulating arm for use in positioning the one or more nozzles. See Abstract and Figures 3 & 5.
In particular, Hjerpe discloses robotic arm with a wrist joint rotationally coupled at one end (Hjerpe at Column 6, Lines 59-62, discloses a wrist joint at the end of the robot arm:” Robotic arm 34 has at least one articulated joint and a wrist enabling appropriate positioning of spray head 33 in inlet 301 of engine 1. The robotic arm is moveable with at least three degrees of freedom.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the pivot mechanism at the end of a robot arm taught in Hjerpe in the washing and de-icing apparatus in Gunner with a reasonable expectation of success because this results in a washing and de-icing apparatus that is flexible and able to reach occluded spaces in an engine compartment which increases the lifetime of the airplane being serviced (see Hjerpe at Column 1, Lines 45-56.).
Gunnar and Hjerpe do not disclose a plurality of hoses and a center hose extending through an interior space of the wrist joint from the first end to the second end, with the plurality of hoses helically wrapped around the center hose; and a hose motor coupled to the first end of the wrist joint and configured to rotate the plurality of hoses and the center hose about a first axis at the first end; and
Garman discloses an assembly for rotating and axially directing a high pressure spray hose and spray head to clean residue from a surface. See Abstract and Figures 1-2.
In Particular Garman discloses a plurality of hoses and a center hose extending through an interior space of the wrist joint from the first end to the second end, with the plurality of hoses helically wrapped around the center hose (Garman at Column 6, Lines 25-32, discloses an assembly for accommodating a plurality of hoses:” reel assembly 120 that can be adjusted with relative ease to accommodate hoses 16 of different diameter and length. The reel assembly 120 provides a base 122 that is defined by a number of annular bands 124 and a center collar piece 126 that mounts to the axle 42. A number of inner and outer cage bands 127 and 128 are vertically offset from the base 122.”).
Garman discloses a hose motor coupled to the first end of the wrist joint and configured to rotate the plurality of hoses and the center hose about a first axis at the first end (Garman at Column 2, Line 66 to Column 3, Lines 1-2, discloses a motor to maintain the hoses coiled to a central axis:” hose drive is coupled to a hose collection reel via a motor driven reel axle. A layering arm extends from the axle and directs the hose onto an adjustable hub at the reel. The hose is preferably stacked in a single layer.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the hose assembly of Garman in the de-icing apparatus in Gunner as modified by Hjerpe with a reasonable expectation of success because this results in an apparatus that can accommodate hoses of various sizes when performing washing or de-icing operations where cleaning time can be reduced and equipment operation improved by coupling the several assemblies to the single line (see Garman column 5, lines 32-34).
a tool motor coupled to the second end and configured to rotate the plurality of hoses and the center hose about a second axis at the second end, wherein the hose motor and the tool motor cooperate with each other to rotate the plurality of hoses and the center hose as the tool is rotated by the tool motor, regardless of a relative angle between the first axis and the second axis (Gunner at Para. [0058] disclosing rotation of the tool:” the nozzle clusters 37 and engines 36 are adapted to rotate in any direction and to rapidly sweep the surface of the aircraft, back and forth as the aircraft 50 moves under the transversal member or arm 34. The telescopic arms 32 and telescopic transversal member 34 are extended or collapsed using any mean known in the art such as actuators, hydraulic system or electric motors coupled to a gear.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the hose assembly of Garman in the de-icing apparatus in Gunner as modified by Hjerpe with a reasonable expectation of success because this results in an apparatus that can accommodate hoses of various sizes when performing washing or de-icing operations where cleaning time can be reduced and equipment operation improved by coupling the several assemblies to the single line (see Garman column 5, lines 32-34).
As per claim 20, Gunner, Hjerpe, and Garman disclose a wrist joint of claim 19, wherein the hose motor and the tool motor cooperate with each other to rotate the plurality of hoses and the center hose as the tool is rotated by the tool motor, regardless of a relative angle between the first axis and the second axis (Garman at Column 5, Lines 31-37, discloses cooperation between the reeling operation of the hose and the tool:” jobs requiring multiple assemblies 10, cleaning time can be reduced and equipment operation improved by coupling the several assemblies 10 to the single air supply 69 and operating the assemblies 10 in complementary fashion. That is, as the hose 18 of one assembly 10 is directed in a cleaning stroke, the hose 18 of another assembly 10 is collected.”).
CONCLUSION
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLIS B. RAMIREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8920. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am to 5:00pm.
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, Ramon Mercado can be reached at 571-270-5744. 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.
/ELLIS B. RAMIREZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights