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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 03/26/2026, has been received and made of record. In response to the Non-Final Office Action, dated on 12/29/2025. Claims 1-10 and 13-21 are pending in the current application. Claims 11-12 and 22 have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 03/26/2026 have been fully considered.
In the Arguments/Remarks:
Re: Claim Objections
Objection of claim 15 for informalities has been withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendments.
Re: Rejection of the Claims Under 35 U.S.C. 101
Rejection of claims 1-22 under 35 U.S.C. 101 has been withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendments.
Re: Rejection of the Claims Under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)
Applicant' s arguments with respect to claims 1-4, 8-16 and 20-22 have been considered but are moot in view of the references cited in the most current rejection. Examiner further submits applicant’s amendments raise a new 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issue (see below).
Re: Rejection of the Claims Under 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant' s arguments with respect to claims 5-7 and 17-19 have been considered but are moot in view of the references cited in the most current rejection. Examiner submits applicant’s amendments raise a new 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issue (see below).
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 1-10, 13, and 15-21 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.
Regarding claim 1, Newly amended claim 1 recites “operating the robot to perform tasks, where the tasks involve performing a plurality of grip and ungrip events by a gripper on the robot, and where the gripper is a mechanical finger-style gripper, a servo-motor driven gripper, a single suction cup gripper or a vacuum gripper tool having a plurality of suction cups arranged in zones… sending alert notifications of any identified issues by the computer, where the alert notifications for a vacuum gripper tool identify one or more of the zones of suction cups which have the identified issue”. Examiner submits that these two limitations render the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the applicant is intending to elect one of the plurality of grippers listed in the Markush grouping above. However, the claim later recites “sending alert notifications of any identified issues by the computer, where the alert notifications for a vacuum gripper tool identify one or more of the zones of suction cups which have the identified issue” and it is unclear and indefinite if the claimed alert notifications are related to only the vacuum gripper or do they equally apply to the mechanical finger-style gripper, servo-motor driven gripper, or single suction cup gripper. Appropriate correction and/or clarification is earnestly solicited. For examination purposes the examiner will be interpreting the Markush grouping (mechanical finger-style gripper, a servo-motor driven gripper, a single suction cup gripper or a vacuum gripper tool having a plurality of suction cups arranged in zones) as being candidates for sending/receiving alert notifications to the computer.
Regarding claims 2-10 and 13, Claims are rejected based on their dependency to a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 15, The claim recites analogous limitations to claim 1 and therefore is rejected on the same premise.
Regarding claims 16-21, Claims are rejected based on their dependency to a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-4, 8-10, 13, 15-16 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosek (US 2014/0201571 A1) in view of Wagner (US 2020/0130935 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hosek teaches a gripper health monitoring method for an industrial robot, said method comprising: operating the robot to perform tasks, where the tasks involve performing a plurality of grip and ungrip events by a gripper on the robot, and where the gripper is a mechanical finger-style gripper, a servo-motor driven gripper, a single suction cup gripper or a vacuum gripper tool having a plurality of suction cups arranged in zones [(see at least paragraph 88) “FIG. 5 shows a schematic of a vacuum-actuated edge-contact gripper system. It includes a bellows 501 attached to a vacuum line on one end and a plunger 503 attached to the other end. In the absence of vacuum, the spring loaded plunger pushes the substrate 505 against the stationary stops 504 and holds it in place. In the presence of vacuum, the plunger is retracted, which releases its hold on the substrate. The position of the flag 507 is used to determine the position of the plunger which, in turn, indicates one of the following three states: unclamped (plunger 503 retracted), properly clamped (plunger 503 partially extended) and clamping failure (plunger 503 fully extended). The gripper is operated by opening and closing a vacuum valve, such as 431A or 431B in FIG. 4. The vacuum pressure may be measured by a pressure sensor, such as 432A or 432B in FIG. 4.”]; recording by a robot controller receiving data from the robot and the gripper, gripper response times for each of the grip events and the ungrip events [(see at least paragraphs 54,154) As in 54 “It is a feature of the disclosed embodiments that the data collection function acquires time histories of selected variables during operation of the machine being monitored, the pre-processing function calculates specific characteristics of the acquired time histories, the analysis function evaluates characteristics of individual components with which the variables are associated and produces one or more hypotheses about the condition of each of the components, and the reasoning function derives an overall assessment of the machine, including the condition of the individual components of the machine and the degree of confidence that the machine is in good operating condition” As in 154 “In addition, a gripping action results in either no gripping or an increase in the gripper operation time. For the vacuum-actuated edge-contact gripper, the grip operation time is measured between the instant when the valve (306, 406) is commanded to open and the time a position sensing flag (308) detects open state of the gripper. For surface-contact suction gripper, the grip operation time is measured between the instant when the valve is commanded to open and the time when the vacuum sensor reading reaches an acceptable vacuum level.”]; analyzing the gripper response times, by a computer having a processor and memory, to provide analyzed gripper timing data [(see at least paragraphs 54-55) “It is a feature of the disclosed embodiments that the data collection function acquires time histories of selected variables during operation of the machine being monitored, the pre-processing function calculates specific characteristics of the acquired time histories, the analysis function evaluates characteristics of individual components with which the variables are associated and produces one or more hypotheses about the condition of each of the components, and the reasoning function derives an overall assessment of the machine, including the condition of the individual components of the machine and the degree of confidence that the machine is in good operating condition.”] identifying any anomalous issues in the gripper response times and the analyzed gripper timing data, by the computer; sending alert notifications of any identified issues by the computer [(see at least paragraphs 74-76) As in 74 “when a potential problem is detected, the manager 130 may initiate collection of additional data by the data collection function 105 for accurate fault diagnosis. The manager 130 may also initiate a template sequence which was pre-designed specifically for health-monitoring and fault-diagnostic purposes.” As in 76 “the system 100 provides at least two distinct functions: health monitoring and fault diagnostics. The purpose of health monitoring is to perform condition assessment of individual components of the robotized tool, and report a service request when a problematic condition of any of the components is identified.”] and uploading the gripper response times, the analyzed gripper timing data and any identified issues from the computer to a web portal for viewing by a robot operator. [(see at least paragraphs 65-67, 136) As in 67 “The function controller 200 may include a user interface 225 with a display 240 and an input device such as a keyboard 255 or mouse 245. The user interface may be operated by a user interface controller 250 under control of processor 205 and may provide a user with a graphical user interface to visualize the results of the health monitoring and fault diagnostics. The user interface may also be used to guide service personnel through troubleshooting routines or repair processes.” As in 136 “Component failures can be categorized broadly into two different types--"chronic" faults that develop gradually and "acute" faults that occur instantly. Faults of the first kind can be detected by a condition monitoring system at their early stages of development. Early detection and repair will help avoid unexpected failure during operation. On the other hand, faults of the second type do not lend themselves to early detection. However, a fault diagnostics system can help diagnose them when they occur and therefore shorten the time to bring the machinery back into operation. The different types of faults that can occur are listed below and summarized in Table 3… Vacuum Leak Gradual Lower vacuum pressure system or measurement; abrupt Increase in pressure transition time. This results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Decrease in pressure between or transition time; vacuum sudden Increase in vacuum sensor and pressure required to actuator accomplish a grip actuation in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a grip release in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Low vacuum pressure between or detected by the vacuum vacuum sudden sensor; valve and Increase in pressure vacuum transition time. This sensor results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Vacuum--Jammed Gradual Increase in vacuum actuated Plunger or pressure for grip edge--abrupt actuation; contact Failure to release grip gripper Broken Abrupt Gripper is always in spring released state”] Examiner notes that the user interface provides the user results of the health monitoring and fault diagnostics of the system. The fault diagnostics include grip activation times.
Hosek does not explicitly teach where the alert notifications for a vacuum gripper tool identify one or more of the zones of suction cups which have the identified issue.
However, Wagner teaches where the alert notifications for a vacuum gripper tool identify one or more of the zones of suction cups which have the identified issue [(see at least paragraph 117) “In a further example involving learning to detect anomalies, trash may sometimes enter a vacuum gripper, and lodge against a screen, reducing the effector's effectiveness. Anomaly detection software might note when sensory signals stray outside of a given region. When the source of an anomaly is identified, such as when human operators note that trash has entered a vacuum gripper, the anomaly detection software may then adjust itself to correctly classify future such anomalies, and alert human operators in a more timely fashion.”]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Hosek to incorporate the teachings of Wagner of where the alert notifications for a vacuum gripper tool identify one or more of the zones of suction cups which have the identified issue in order to adjust itself to correctly classify future such anomalies, and alert human operators in a timely fashion. [(Wagner 117)]
Regarding claim 2, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein recording gripper response times includes recording the response times by the robot controller and providing the response times to a data collection device. [(see at least Fig.1, paragraphs 68, 136) As in 68 “the data collection function 105 operates to acquire time histories of selected variables relating to the operation of a device being monitored. A time history refers to a collection of values for a particular variable or group of variables over time. In addition to the elements of the function controller 200 described above, the data collection function 105 includes one or more buffers 125 for collecting the values of the selected variables. The data collection function 105 also includes programs and circuitry 135 for specifying the device signals and variables to be recorded, setting the sampling period for data recording, setting the trigger mode for data recording (e.g., on event, on start of move, on end of move, when above threshold, when below threshold, with delay), setting the number of samples to be recorded, and setting the mechanism to stop data recording (e.g., when specified, on event, on end of move, on error, with delay).”]
Regarding claim 3, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein gripper response times for grippers on other robots are also provided to the data collection device by each of the other robots’ controllers, and the gripper response times for all of the robots are communicated from the data collection device to the computer. [(see at least paragraphs 65-68, 136) As in 65 “Network interface 230 may be generally adapted to provide an interface between the function controller 200 and other function controllers, system controllers, or other systems. Network interface 230 may operate to receive data from one or more additional function controllers and to convey data to the same or other function controllers. Network interface 230 may also provide an interface to a global diagnostic system that may provide remote monitoring and diagnostic services”]
Regarding claim 4, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein the data collection device, the computer and the web portal also handle other health status data for all of the robots. [(see at least paragraphs 65-68, 136) As in 67 “The function controller 200 may include a user interface 225 with a display 240 and an input device such as a keyboard 255 or mouse 245. The user interface may be operated by a user interface controller 250 under control of processor 205 and may provide a user with a graphical user interface to visualize the results of the health monitoring and fault diagnostics. The user interface may also be used to guide service personnel through troubleshooting routines or repair processes. In addition, the user interface controller may also provide a connection or interface 255 for communicating with other function controllers, an external network, another control system, or a host computer.”]
Regarding claim 8, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein analyzing the gripper response times includes identifying a maximum grip time and a maximum ungrip time for a current analysis data period, computing an average grip time and an average ungrip time for the current analysis data period, and computing a grip time trend line slope and an ungrip time trend line slope for the current analysis period. [(see at least paragraphs 54, 65-70, 136) As in 54 “It is a feature of the disclosed embodiments that the data collection function acquires time histories of selected variables during operation of the machine being monitored, the pre-processing function calculates specific characteristics of the acquired time histories, the analysis function evaluates characteristics of individual components with which the variables are associated and produces one or more hypotheses about the condition of each of the components, and the reasoning function derives an overall assessment of the machine, including the condition of the individual components of the machine and the degree of confidence that the machine is in good operating condition.” As in 68 “the data collection function 105 operates to acquire time histories of selected variables relating to the operation of a device being monitored. A time history refers to a collection of values for a particular variable or group of variables over time. In addition to the elements of the function controller 200 described above, the data collection function 105 includes one or more buffers 125 for collecting the values of the selected variables. The data collection function 105 also includes programs and circuitry 135 for specifying the device signals and variables to be recorded, setting the sampling period for data recording, setting the trigger mode for data recording (e.g., on event, on start of move, on end of move, when above threshold, when below threshold, with delay), setting the number of samples to be recorded, and setting the mechanism to stop data recording (e.g., when specified, on event, on end of move, on error, with delay).” As in 136 “This results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Decrease in pressure between or transition time; vacuum sudden Increase in vacuum sensor and pressure required to actuator accomplish a grip actuation in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a grip release in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Low vacuum pressure between or detected by the vacuum vacuum sudden sensor; valve and Increase in pressure vacuum transition time. This sensor results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact”]
Regarding claim 9, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein the current analysis data period has a duration in a range of a half hour to four hours. [(see at least paragraphs 65-70) As in 68 “The data collection function 105 also includes programs and circuitry 135 for specifying the device signals and variables to be recorded, setting the sampling period for data recording, setting the trigger mode for data recording (e.g., on event, on start of move, on end of move, when above threshold, when below threshold, with delay), setting the number of samples to be recorded, and setting the mechanism to stop data recording (e.g., when specified, on event, on end of move, on error, with delay)”]
Regarding claim 10, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein identifying any anomalous issues includes identifying missing or stale gripper response times, identifying a maximum grip time, a maximum ungrip time, an average grip time or an average ungrip time exceeding a threshold value, and identifying a grip time trend line slope or an ungrip time trend line slope exceeding a trend line slope threshold value. [(see at least paragraphs 54, 65-70, 136) As in 68 “the data collection function 105 operates to acquire time histories of selected variables relating to the operation of a device being monitored. A time history refers to a collection of values for a particular variable or group of variables over time. In addition to the elements of the function controller 200 described above, the data collection function 105 includes one or more buffers 125 for collecting the values of the selected variables. The data collection function 105 also includes programs and circuitry 135 for specifying the device signals and variables to be recorded, setting the sampling period for data recording, setting the trigger mode for data recording (e.g., on event, on start of move, on end of move, when above threshold, when below threshold, with delay), setting the number of samples to be recorded, and setting the mechanism to stop data recording (e.g., when specified, on event, on end of move, on error, with delay).” As in 136 “Increase in tracking errors. Vacuum Leak Gradual Lower vacuum pressure system or measurement; abrupt Increase in pressure transition time. This results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Decrease in pressure between or transition time; vacuum sudden Increase in vacuum sensor and pressure required to actuator accomplish a grip actuation in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a grip release in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Low vacuum pressure between or detected by the vacuum vacuum sudden sensor; valve and Increase in pressure vacuum transition time. This sensor results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Vacuum--Jammed Gradual Increase in vacuum actuated Plunger or pressure for grip edge--abrupt actuation; contact Failure to release grip gripper ”]
Regarding claim 13, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein sending alert notifications includes sending one or more of text messages, instant messages, emails and notifications to the robot controller. [(see at least paragraph 164) “Failure of communication module on the motor controllers: The master controller listens to status messages from the motor controllers. The master controller can detect failure of a motor controller by detecting the absence of status messages from that motor controller. This process is also referred to as "node guarding."”]
Regarding claim 15, Hosek teaches a gripper health monitoring system for industrial robots, said system comprising: one or more robots, each robot having a gripper as an end-of-arm tool, the one or more robots performing tasks which involve performing a plurality of grip and ungrip events by the gripper, where the gripper is a mechanical finger-style gripper, a servo-motor driven gripper, a single suction cup gripper or a vacuum gripper tool having a plurality of suction cups arranged in zones [(see at least Figs.4-6, paragraphs 85-88) As in 85 “the robotic manipulator is built around an open cylindrical frame 401 suspended from a circular mounting flange 402. The frame 401 incorporates a vertical rail 403 with linear bearing 404 to provide guidance to a carriage 405 driven by a brushless DC motor 406 via a ball-screw mechanism 407. The carriage 405 houses a pair of coaxial brushless DC motors 408, 409 equipped with optical encoders 410, 411. The upper motor 408 drives a hollow outer shaft 412 connected to the first link 414 of the robot arm. The lower motor 409 is connected to a coaxial inner shaft 413 which is coupled via a belt drive 415 to the second link 416. The first link 414 houses a brushless DC motor 417A which drives through a two-stage belt arrangement 418A, 419A the upper end-effector 420A. Another DC brushless motor 417B and a two-stage belt drive 418B, 419B are employed to actuate the lower end-effector 420B. Each of the stages 418A, 418B, 419A and 419B are designed with a 1:2 ratio between the input and output pulleys. Substrates 421A and 421B are held attached to end-effectors 420A and 420B, respectively, by the means of vacuum-actuated edge-contact grippers or surface-contact suction grippers”]; a robot controller in communication with each robot, each controller having a processor and memory configured to record gripper response times for each of the grip events and the ungrip events [(see at least paragraphs 54,154) As in 54 “It is a feature of the disclosed embodiments that the data collection function acquires time histories of selected variables during operation of the machine being monitored, the pre-processing function calculates specific characteristics of the acquired time histories, the analysis function evaluates characteristics of individual components with which the variables are associated and produces one or more hypotheses about the condition of each of the components, and the reasoning function derives an overall assessment of the machine, including the condition of the individual components of the machine and the degree of confidence that the machine is in good operating condition” As in 154 “In addition, a gripping action results in either no gripping or an increase in the gripper operation time. For the vacuum-actuated edge-contact gripper, the grip operation time is measured between the instant when the valve (306, 406) is commanded to open and the time a position sensing flag (308) detects open state of the gripper. For surface-contact suction gripper, the grip operation time is measured between the instant when the valve is commanded to open and the time when the vacuum sensor reading reaches an acceptable vacuum level.”]; a data collection device in communication with the robot controllers and receiving the gripper response times for each of the robots; and a computer having a processor and memory, said computer periodically receiving the gripper response times from the data collection device, where the computer is configured for: analyzing the gripper response times for each individual gripper to provide analyzed gripper timing data [(see at least paragraphs 54-55) “It is a feature of the disclosed embodiments that the data collection function acquires time histories of selected variables during operation of the machine being monitored, the pre-processing function calculates specific characteristics of the acquired time histories, the analysis function evaluates characteristics of individual components with which the variables are associated and produces one or more hypotheses about the condition of each of the components, and the reasoning function derives an overall assessment of the machine, including the condition of the individual components of the machine and the degree of confidence that the machine is in good operating condition.”]; identifying any anomalous issues in the gripper response times and the analyzed gripper timing data for each individual gripper; sending alert notifications of any identified issues [(see at least paragraphs 74-76) As in 74 “when a potential problem is detected, the manager 130 may initiate collection of additional data by the data collection function 105 for accurate fault diagnosis. The manager 130 may also initiate a template sequence which was pre-designed specifically for health-monitoring and fault-diagnostic purposes.” As in 76 “the system 100 provides at least two distinct functions: health monitoring and fault diagnostics. The purpose of health monitoring is to perform condition assessment of individual components of the robotized tool, and report a service request when a problematic condition of any of the components is identified.”]; and uploading the gripper response times, the analyzed gripper timing data and any identified issues to a web portal for viewing by a robot operator. [(see at least paragraphs 65-67, 136) As in 67 “The function controller 200 may include a user interface 225 with a display 240 and an input device such as a keyboard 255 or mouse 245. The user interface may be operated by a user interface controller 250 under control of processor 205 and may provide a user with a graphical user interface to visualize the results of the health monitoring and fault diagnostics. The user interface may also be used to guide service personnel through troubleshooting routines or repair processes.” As in 136 “Component failures can be categorized broadly into two different types--"chronic" faults that develop gradually and "acute" faults that occur instantly. Faults of the first kind can be detected by a condition monitoring system at their early stages of development. Early detection and repair will help avoid unexpected failure during operation. On the other hand, faults of the second type do not lend themselves to early detection. However, a fault diagnostics system can help diagnose them when they occur and therefore shorten the time to bring the machinery back into operation. The different types of faults that can occur are listed below and summarized in Table 3… Vacuum Leak Gradual Lower vacuum pressure system or measurement; abrupt Increase in pressure transition time. This results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Decrease in pressure between or transition time; vacuum sudden Increase in vacuum sensor and pressure required to actuator accomplish a grip actuation in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a grip release in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Low vacuum pressure between or detected by the vacuum vacuum sudden sensor; valve and Increase in pressure vacuum transition time. This sensor results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Vacuum--Jammed Gradual Increase in vacuum actuated Plunger or pressure for grip edge--abrupt actuation; contact Failure to release grip gripper Broken Abrupt Gripper is always in spring released state”] Examiner notes that the user interface provides the user results of the health monitoring and fault diagnostics of the system. The fault diagnostics include grip activation times.
Hosek does not explicitly teach where the alert notifications for a vacuum gripper tool identify one or more of the zones of suction cups which have the identified issue.
However, Wagner teaches where the alert notifications for a vacuum gripper tool identify one or more of the zones of suction cups which have the identified issue [(see at least paragraph 117) “In a further example involving learning to detect anomalies, trash may sometimes enter a vacuum gripper, and lodge against a screen, reducing the effector's effectiveness. Anomaly detection software might note when sensory signals stray outside of a given region. When the source of an anomaly is identified, such as when human operators note that trash has entered a vacuum gripper, the anomaly detection software may then adjust itself to correctly classify future such anomalies, and alert human operators in a more timely fashion.”]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Hosek to incorporate the teachings of Wagner of where the alert notifications for a vacuum gripper tool identify one or more of the zones of suction cups which have the identified issue in order to adjust itself to correctly classify future such anomalies, and alert human operators in a timely fashion. [(Wagner 117)]
Regarding claim 16, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein the data collection device, the computer and the web portal also handle other health status data for all of the robots. [(see at least paragraphs 65-68, 136) As in 67 “The function controller 200 may include a user interface 225 with a display 240 and an input device such as a keyboard 255 or mouse 245. The user interface may be operated by a user interface controller 250 under control of processor 205 and may provide a user with a graphical user interface to visualize the results of the health monitoring and fault diagnostics. The user interface may also be used to guide service personnel through troubleshooting routines or repair processes. In addition, the user interface controller may also provide a connection or interface 255 for communicating with other function controllers, an external network, another control system, or a host computer.”]
Regarding claim 20, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein analyzing the gripper response times includes identifying a maximum grip time and a maximum ungrip time for a current analysis data period, computing an average grip time and an average ungrip time for the current analysis data period, and computing a grip time trend line slope and an ungrip time trend line slope for the current analysis period. [(see at least paragraphs 54, 65-70, 136) As in 54 “It is a feature of the disclosed embodiments that the data collection function acquires time histories of selected variables during operation of the machine being monitored, the pre-processing function calculates specific characteristics of the acquired time histories, the analysis function evaluates characteristics of individual components with which the variables are associated and produces one or more hypotheses about the condition of each of the components, and the reasoning function derives an overall assessment of the machine, including the condition of the individual components of the machine and the degree of confidence that the machine is in good operating condition.” As in 68 “the data collection function 105 operates to acquire time histories of selected variables relating to the operation of a device being monitored. A time history refers to a collection of values for a particular variable or group of variables over time. In addition to the elements of the function controller 200 described above, the data collection function 105 includes one or more buffers 125 for collecting the values of the selected variables. The data collection function 105 also includes programs and circuitry 135 for specifying the device signals and variables to be recorded, setting the sampling period for data recording, setting the trigger mode for data recording (e.g., on event, on start of move, on end of move, when above threshold, when below threshold, with delay), setting the number of samples to be recorded, and setting the mechanism to stop data recording (e.g., when specified, on event, on end of move, on error, with delay).” As in 136 “This results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Decrease in pressure between or transition time; vacuum sudden Increase in vacuum sensor and pressure required to actuator accomplish a grip actuation in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a grip release in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Low vacuum pressure between or detected by the vacuum vacuum sudden sensor; valve and Increase in pressure vacuum transition time. This sensor results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact”]
Regarding claim 21, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein identifying any anomalous issues includes identifying missing or stale gripper response times, identifying a maximum grip time, a maximum ungrip time, an average grip time or an average ungrip time exceeding a threshold value, and identifying a grip time trend line slope or an ungrip time trend line slope exceeding a trend line slope threshold value. [(see at least paragraphs 54, 65-70, 136) As in 68 “the data collection function 105 operates to acquire time histories of selected variables relating to the operation of a device being monitored. A time history refers to a collection of values for a particular variable or group of variables over time. In addition to the elements of the function controller 200 described above, the data collection function 105 includes one or more buffers 125 for collecting the values of the selected variables. The data collection function 105 also includes programs and circuitry 135 for specifying the device signals and variables to be recorded, setting the sampling period for data recording, setting the trigger mode for data recording (e.g., on event, on start of move, on end of move, when above threshold, when below threshold, with delay), setting the number of samples to be recorded, and setting the mechanism to stop data recording (e.g., when specified, on event, on end of move, on error, with delay).” As in 136 “Increase in tracking errors. Vacuum Leak Gradual Lower vacuum pressure system or measurement; abrupt Increase in pressure transition time. This results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Decrease in pressure between or transition time; vacuum sudden Increase in vacuum sensor and pressure required to actuator accomplish a grip actuation in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a grip release in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Obstruction Gradual Low vacuum pressure between or detected by the vacuum vacuum sudden sensor; valve and Increase in pressure vacuum transition time. This sensor results in an increase in grip actuation time in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and an increase in grip release time in the case of a vacuum actuated edge contact gripper; Failure to grip, in the case of a surface contact vacuum gripper and a failure to ungrip in the case of a vacuum operated edge contact gripper Vacuum--Jammed Gradual Increase in vacuum actuated Plunger or pressure for grip edge--abrupt actuation; contact Failure to release grip gripper ”]
Claims 5-7 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosek in view of Wagner and in further view of Shimizu (US 2015/0266084 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Hosek has all of the elements of claim 1 as discussed above.
Hosek does not explicitly teach wherein the response time for each grip or ungrip event is determined by starting a timer when a grip or ungrip command is issued by the robot controller and stopping the timer when a corresponding grip or ungrip is confirmed to have occurred.
However, Shimizu teaches wherein the response time for each grip or ungrip event is determined by starting a timer when a grip or ungrip command is issued by the robot controller and stopping the timer when a corresponding grip or ungrip is confirmed to have occurred. [(see at least paragraphs 65-75) As in 65 “he high speed multi-jointed robot 60A (60B) described above is, as shown in FIG. 4, equipped with a controller unit U (control means) which controls the first adjusting valve 64A3 (64B3), the second adjusting valve 65A3 (65B3), a drive adjusting unit 80 for the electrode chucks 22 and 22, and a robot drive adjusting unit 81. A receiving timing signal from a receiving timing detecting mechanism 82 that detects that heating in the upsetter 20A (20B) is terminated (the completion of formation), an elapsed time TC1 signal from a first elapsed time detecting mechanism 83 that detects an elapsed time TC1 of a first timer, an elapsed time TC2 signal from a second elapsed time detecting mechanism 84 that detects an elapsed time TC2 of a second timer, gripping and gripping-release signals from a first claw part state detecting sensor 85 that detects gripping and gripping-released states of the first pair of claw parts 64A1 (64B1), gripping and gripping-release signals from a second claw part state detecting sensor 86 that detects gripping and gripping-released states of the second pair of claw parts 65A1 (65B1), a positional information signal from a positional information detecting sensor 87 that detects positional information on the first and second pairs of claw parts 64A1 and 65A1 (64B1 and 65B1), a moving state signal from a movement detecting sensor 88 that detects the presence or absence of a movement of the robot hand, and holding and holding-release signals from an electrode chuck state detecting sensor 89 that detects holding and holding-released states of the electrode chucks 22 and 22 are input to the controller unit U.”]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Hosek to incorporate the teachings of Shimizu of the response time for each grip or ungrip event is determined by starting a timer when a grip or ungrip command is issued by the robot controller and stopping the timer when a corresponding grip or ungrip is confirmed to have occurred in order to that detect and measure an elapsed time during gripping and ungripping operation of the robot [(Shmizu 65)].
Regarding claim 6, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein the corresponding grip or ungrip is confirmed to have occurred by a part presence sensor detecting proximity of a part to the gripper, or by analyzing signals from a camera or sensor in which the signals depict a position of the part or the gripper or both. [(see at least paragraph 233) “A video camera can also be installed directly on the robot end-effector to monitor pick and place operations performed by the robot, including the operation of the edge-contact gripper. The resulting video can be recorded and serve in diagnostics of failures during pick and place operations. This is an extremely valuable tool for failures that occur rarely, cannot be observed by the operator and/or are difficult to reproduce. Video signals can be used to identify faults that affect robot position repeatability. Typical faults that affect repeatability are slipping of timing belts, belt stretching leading to hysteresis and loosening of bearing clamps.”]
Regarding claim 7, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein the corresponding grip or ungrip is confirmed to have occurred by evaluating a pressure signal from a vacuum line for a vacuum or suction gripper, or a signal from a motor torque or position sensor for a servo-controlled gripper. [(see at least paragraph 154) “Vacuum leak: Vacuum leaks can occur due to wear and tear on the lip seals. A leak in the vacuum line results in a lower vacuum pressure (when vacuum valve is open and, in case of surface-contact suction gripper, substrate is present on the end-effector), and can be detected through a drop in the vacuum sensor (302, 402) reading. In addition, a gripping action results in either no gripping or an increase in the gripper operation time. For the vacuum-actuated edge-contact gripper, the grip operation time is measured between the instant when the valve (306, 406) is commanded to open and the time a position sensing flag (308) detects open state of the gripper. For surface-contact suction gripper, the grip operation time is measured between the instant when the valve is commanded to open and the time when the vacuum sensor reading reaches an acceptable vacuum level.”]
Regarding claim 17, Hosek has all of the elements of claim 15 as discussed above.
Hosek does not explicitly teach wherein the response time for each grip or ungrip event is determined by starting a timer when a grip or ungrip command is issued by the robot controller and stopping the timer when a corresponding grip or ungrip is confirmed to have occurred.
However, Shimizu teaches wherein the response time for each grip or ungrip event is determined by starting a timer when a grip or ungrip command is issued by the robot controller and stopping the timer when a corresponding grip or ungrip is confirmed to have occurred. [(see at least paragraphs 65-75) As in 65 “he high speed multi-jointed robot 60A (60B) described above is, as shown in FIG. 4, equipped with a controller unit U (control means) which controls the first adjusting valve 64A3 (64B3), the second adjusting valve 65A3 (65B3), a drive adjusting unit 80 for the electrode chucks 22 and 22, and a robot drive adjusting unit 81. A receiving timing signal from a receiving timing detecting mechanism 82 that detects that heating in the upsetter 20A (20B) is terminated (the completion of formation), an elapsed time TC1 signal from a first elapsed time detecting mechanism 83 that detects an elapsed time TC1 of a first timer, an elapsed time TC2 signal from a second elapsed time detecting mechanism 84 that detects an elapsed time TC2 of a second timer, gripping and gripping-release signals from a first claw part state detecting sensor 85 that detects gripping and gripping-released states of the first pair of claw parts 64A1 (64B1), gripping and gripping-release signals from a second claw part state detecting sensor 86 that detects gripping and gripping-released states of the second pair of claw parts 65A1 (65B1), a positional information signal from a positional information detecting sensor 87 that detects positional information on the first and second pairs of claw parts 64A1 and 65A1 (64B1 and 65B1), a moving state signal from a movement detecting sensor 88 that detects the presence or absence of a movement of the robot hand, and holding and holding-release signals from an electrode chuck state detecting sensor 89 that detects holding and holding-released states of the electrode chucks 22 and 22 are input to the controller unit U.”]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Hosek to incorporate the teachings of Shimizu of the response time for each grip or ungrip event is determined by starting a timer when a grip or ungrip command is issued by the robot controller and stopping the timer when a corresponding grip or ungrip is confirmed to have occurred in order to that detect and measure an elapsed time during gripping and ungripping operation of the robot [(Shmizu 65)].
Regarding claim 18, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein the corresponding grip or ungrip is confirmed to have occurred by a part presence sensor detecting proximity of a part to the gripper, or by analyzing signals from a camera or sensor in which the signals depict a position of the part or the gripper or both. [(see at least paragraph 233) “A video camera can also be installed directly on the robot end-effector to monitor pick and place operations performed by the robot, including the operation of the edge-contact gripper. The resulting video can be recorded and serve in diagnostics of failures during pick and place operations. This is an extremely valuable tool for failures that occur rarely, cannot be observed by the operator and/or are difficult to reproduce. Video signals can be used to identify faults that affect robot position repeatability. Typical faults that affect repeatability are slipping of timing belts, belt stretching leading to hysteresis and loosening of bearing clamps.”]
Regarding claim 19, In view of the above combination of references, Hosek further teaches wherein the corresponding grip or ungrip is confirmed to have occurred by evaluating a pressure signal from a vacuum line for a vacuum or suction gripper, or a signal from a motor torque or position sensor for a servo-controlled gripper. [(see at least paragraph 154) “Vacuum leak: Vacuum leaks can occur due to wear and tear on the lip seals. A leak in the vacuum line results in a lower vacuum pressure (when vacuum valve is open and, in case of surface-contact suction gripper, substrate is present on the end-effector), and can be detected through a drop in the vacuum sensor (302, 402) reading. In addition, a gripping action results in either no gripping or an increase in the gripper operation time. For the vacuum-actuated edge-contact gripper, the grip operation time is measured between the instant when the valve (306, 406) is commanded to open and the time a position sensing flag (308) detects open state of the gripper. For surface-contact suction gripper, the grip operation time is measured between the instant when the valve is commanded to open and the time when the vacuum sensor reading reaches an acceptable vacuum level.”]
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is allowed. The following is an examiner’s reasons for allowance: Claim 14 is directed towards a health monitoring method for an end-of-arm tool on an industrial robot. Claim 14 differs from the prior art in that the health monitoring method in the context of the claims includes “analyzing the response times, by a computer having a processor and memory, to provide analyzed tool timing data, where a task time is an elapsed time from the start to the stop of each task, and where analyzing the response times includes identifying a maximum task time for a current analysis data period, computing an average task time for the current analysis data period, and computing a task time trend line slope for the current analysis period” and “identifying any anomalous issues in the response times and the analyzed tool timing data, by the computer, including identifying missing response times, identifying stale response times older than a predefined maximum time interval, identifying an instance of the maximum task time exceeding a first threshold value, identifying when the average task time exceeds a second threshold value, and identifying a predicted task time exceeding a third threshold value based on the task time trend line slope”. Prior art Hosek discloses a machine-health monitoring system that watches selected signals from a machine over time, such as motor current, position, torque, temperature, vibration, vacuum pressure, or encoder output. It then processes those signals to extract useful features, like averages, peaks, frequency content, residuals, or energy use. Next, the system analyzes the features to form one or more possible explanations for what condition a component is in. A reasoning layer then combines those hypotheses to decide the component’s condition and whether service or preventive maintenance is needed. Prior art Wagner discloses a warehouse or distribution-center system that moves objects from a supply location to one of several processing stations, such as robotic pick stations or manual stations. The system identifies each object using labels such as which robot, gripper, grasp point, motion style, or human station should handle the object. The object is then routed to a station that is suited to that class. After processing, barcodes, RFID, images, or other data, and combines that with sensor-derived information such as weight, shape, volume, or material. Based on that combined information, the system assigns the object the system measures whether the pick, move, or placement worked well. Wagner further discloses the system observes whether the interaction succeeded or failed. It can use cameras, depth sensors, flow sensors, pressure sensors, force sensors, scales, and human feedback to judge performance. However, the prior art fails to disclose and fully teach in the context of the claim “analyzing the response times, by a computer having a processor and memory, to provide analyzed tool timing data, where a task time is an elapsed time from the start to the stop of each task, and where analyzing the response times includes identifying a maximum task time for a current analysis data period, computing an average task time for the current analysis data period, and computing a task time trend line slope for the current analysis period” and “identifying any anomalous issues in the response times and the analyzed tool timing data, by the computer, including identifying missing response times, identifying stale response times older than a predefined maximum time interval, identifying an instance of the maximum task time exceeding a first threshold value, identifying when the average task time exceeds a second threshold value, and identifying a predicted task time exceeding a third threshold value based on the task time trend line slope”. The references fail to disclose and teach all of the features AND a suitable motivation to combine and add these missing features. Therefore, when combined together and with the other limitations, provide a more efficient and novel health monitoring method for an end-of-arm tool on an industrial robot.
The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the Applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. See MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed Invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
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 MOHAMMED YOUSEF ABUELHAWA whose telephone number is (571)272-3219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00 with flex.
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, Wade Miles can be reached at 571-270-7777. 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.
/MOHAMMED YOUSEF ABUELHAWA/Examiner, Art Unit 3656
/WADE MILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights