DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 6 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6, line 1, recites “wherein configuration” which is grammatically incorrect and should be changed to --wherein a configuration--.
Claim 13, line 1, recites “wherein configuration” which is grammatically incorrect and should be changed to --wherein a configuration--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 2-17 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.
Claim 2, line 8, recites “a second rotating mechanism” which is indefinite because the limitation is after an “and/or” limitation which is proceeded by the phrase “a first rotating mechanism”. How can the second rotating mechanism be present without a previously claimed first rotating mechanism? The “or” term makes the language before “or” optional, but the language after the “or” term requires the language before the “or” term. The Applicant is advised to remove “or” from the claim.
Claim 9, line 6, recites “a second driving mechanism” which is indefinite because the limitation is after an “and/or” limitation which is proceeded by the phrase “a first driving mechanism”. How can the second driving mechanism be present without a previously claimed first driving mechanism? The “or” term makes the language before “or” optional, but the language after the “or” term requires the language before the “or” term. The Applicant is advised to remove “or” from the claim.
Claim 11, lines 2-3, recites “a fifth rotating component, a seventh rotating component, and an eighth rotating component” which is indefinite because it is unclear how there can be a seventh rotating component and an eighth rotating component without a previously claimed sixth rotating component. Where is the sixth rotating component?
Claim 12, line 6, recites “a third condition and a fourth condition” which is indefinite because it is unclear how there can be a third condition without a previously claimed first condition and second condition. A first condition and a second condition are claimed in claim 5, but claim 12 does not depend from claim 5.
Claim 15, lines 2-3, recites “a third guiding component and a third mounting component” which is indefinite because it is unclear how there can be a third guiding component and a third mounting component without a previously claimed second guiding component and a second mounting component. A second guiding component and a second mounting component are claimed in claim 8, but claim 15 does not depend from claim 8.
Claim 15, lines 6-7, recites “a fourth guiding component and a fourth mounting component” which is indefinite because the limitation is after an “and/or” limitation which is proceeded by the phrase “a third guiding component and a third mounting component”. How can the fourth guiding component and the fourth mounting component be present without a previously claimed third guiding component and third mounting component? The “or” term makes the language before “or” optional, but the language after the “or” term requires the language before the “or” term. The Applicant is advised to remove “or” from the claim.
Claim 16, line 2, recites “a third driving mechanism” which is indefinite because it is unclear how there can be a third driving mechanism without a previously claimed second driving mechanism. A second driving mechanism is claimed in claim 9, but claim 16 does not depend from claim 9.
Claim 16, line 6, recites “a fourth driving mechanism” which is indefinite because the limitation is after an “and/or” limitation which is proceeded by the phrase “a third driving mechanism”. How can the fourth driving mechanism be present without a previously claimed third driving mechanism? The “or” term makes the language before “or” optional, but the language after the “or” term requires the language before the “or” term. The Applicant is advised to remove “or” from the claim.
Claim 17, line 5, recites “a second motor” which is indefinite because the limitation is after an “and/or” limitation which is proceeded by the phrase “a first motor”. How can the second motor be present without a previously claimed first motor? The “or” term makes the language before “or” optional, but the language after the “or” term requires the language before the “or” term. The Applicant is advised to remove “or” from the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 10, and 18, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie et al. (CN 207745190 U; see provided machine translation) in view of Cheng (TW I624341 B; see provided machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Xi et al. discloses a mechanical arm, comprising:
a base link (1);
a parallelogram mechanism (6, 14-17), comprising a first linkage (14), a second linkage (15), a third linkage (16), and a fourth linkage (17) sequentially connected by rotation, wherein the parallelogram mechanism is rotatably connected to the base link about an axis (the axial centerline of 3) coinciding with a first rotation axis (the axial centerline of 3) between the first linkage and the second linkage, and the parallelogram mechanism has a degree of freedom coming from an overall rotation of the parallelogram mechanism relative to the base link and a degree of freedom coming from relative rotation between two adjacent linkages (the movement between 14 and 16) of the parallelogram mechanism.
Xie et al. does not disclose a gravity compensation mechanism, comprising a rotating mechanism and an elastic mechanism, wherein the rotating mechanism is coupled to the base link and at least one of the first linkage and the second linkage, and the elastic mechanism is coupled to the base link and the rotating mechanism, so as to generate a compensation moment balanced with a gravity moment of the parallelogram mechanism in at least one degree of freedom associated with the parallelogram mechanism.
Cheng teaches a gravity compensation mechanism (25), comprising a rotating mechanism (24) and an elastic mechanism (25), wherein the rotating mechanism is coupled to a base link (21) and at least one of a first linkage (221) and a second linkage (231), and the elastic mechanism is coupled to the base link and the rotating mechanism (see Figure 2), so as to generate a compensation moment balanced with a gravity moment of a parallelogram mechanism (221, 231, 233, 272) in at least one degree of freedom associated with the parallelogram mechanism..
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the mechanical arm of Xie et al. to have a gravity compensation mechanism comprised of a rotating mechanism and an elastic mechanism, to have the rotating mechanism is coupled to the base link and at least one of the first linkage and the second linkage, and to have the elastic mechanism coupled to the base link and the rotating mechanism, so as to generate a compensation moment balanced with a gravity moment of the parallelogram mechanism in at least one degree of freedom associated with the parallelogram mechanism, as taught by Cheng, for the purpose of providing a structure that aids in maintaining the positioning of the linkages of the parallelogram without operating the motors thus aiding in extending the operability of the motors.
Regarding claim 2, Xie et al. in view of Cheng discloses that the rotating mechanism comprises a first rotating mechanism (24; Cheng), the elastic mechanism comprises a first clastic mechanism (25; Cheng), the first rotating mechanism is coupled to the base link and one of the first linkage and the second linkage (the phrase “coupled to” is broad enough to encompass the structure show in Cheng), and the first elastic mechanism is coupled to the base link and the first rotating mechanism, so as to generate the compensation moment balanced with the gravity moment of the parallelogram mechanism in one degree of freedom associated with the parallelogram mechanism (the phrase “coupled to” is broad enough to encompass the structure show in Cheng); and/or
the rotating mechanism comprises a second rotating mechanism, the elastic mechanism comprises a second elastic mechanism, the second rotating mechanism is coupled to the base link and the other of the first linkage and the second linkage, and the second elastic mechanism is coupled to the base link and the second rotating mechanism, so as to generate the compensation moment balanced with the gravity moment of the parallelogram mechanism in another degree of freedom associated with the parallelogram mechanism.
Regarding claim 3, Xie et al. in view of Cheng discloses that the parallelogram comprises a first degree of freedom (the rotation about the axial centerline of 3; Xie et al.), the first degree of freedom comprises the degree of freedom coming from the overall rotation of the parallelogram mechanism about the first rotation axis, the first rotating mechanism is coupled to the base link and the first linkage (see Figure 1 of Xie et al.), and the first elastic mechanism generates the compensation moment balanced with the gravity moment of the parallelogram mechanism in the first degree of freedom.
Regarding claim 10, Xie et al. in view of Cheng discloses that the parallelogram mechanism comprises a second degree of freedom (the movement between 14 and 16), the second degree of freedom comprises the degree of freedom coming from the relative rotation between the two adjacent linkages of the parallelogram mechanism, the second rotating mechanism is coupled to the base link and the second linkage, and the second elastic mechanism generates the compensation moment balanced with the gravity moment of the parallelogram mechanism in the second degree of freedom.
Regarding claim 18, Xie et al. in view of Cheng discloses an angle range of the rotation between the two adjacent linkages in the parallelogram mechanism is θ∈(0°, 180°); the parallelogram mechanism comprises a load connected to a distal end of the parallelogram mechanism, and the gravity compensation mechanism is further configured to generate a compensation moment balanced with a gravity moment of the parallelogram mechanism comprising the load.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (WO 2019/174543 A1; US 11,986,263 B2 is being used for translation purposes only) in view of Xie et al. (CN 207745190 U; see provided machine translation) in view of Cheng (TW I624341 B; see provided machine translation).
Regarding claim 19, Wang discloses a master operating platform (1000), comprising an operating portion (the computer part of 1000) **[configured to generate a control command which comprises a pose instruction]**.
Wang does not disclose that the operation portion comprises the mechanical arm of claim 1 for the purpose of providing a mechanical arm that has a large moving space, simple design, reduces the main operation front end weight, and provides driving torque and joint angle detection (see the Abstract of the provided machine translation of Xie et al.).
Xie et al. in view of Cheng teaches the mechanical arm of claim 1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the mechanical arm of Wang to be the mechanical arm of claim 1 for the purpose of providing a mechanical arm that has a large moving space, simple design, reduces the main operation front end weight, and provides driving torque and joint angle detection, as taught by Xie et al. in view of Cheng.
Regarding claim 20, Wang in view of Xie et al. in view of Cheng discloses a surgical robot (see Figure 1; Wang), comprising a slave operating equipment (2000; Wang) and the master operating platform of claim 19, wherein the slave operating equipment performs a corresponding operation based on the control command from the master operating platform.
**The above statements in brackets are instances of intended use and functional language. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does, see MPEP 2114. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-9 and 11-17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
J. Lemer (US 3,276,604 A) discloses a user operated arm structure that is formed with four arm members that are connected by a plurality of joints.
Biafore et al. (US 2024/0042628 A1) discloses a self-balancing articulated arm that is comprised of a base link, a plurality of arm members connected to the base link, a user operated element at a distal end of the articulated arm, and one or more springs that is connected by the plurality of arm members.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM D ROGERS whose telephone number is (571)272-6561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 6AM-2:00PM EST.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at (571)272-2706. 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.
/ADAM D ROGERS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617