Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/727,921

ROBOT

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jul 10, 2024
Examiner
CUMAR, NATHAN
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
927 granted / 1183 resolved
+26.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+15.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1223
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
41.3%
+1.3% vs TC avg
§102
27.5%
-12.5% vs TC avg
§112
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1183 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-12 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 1 recites “joint block 120 coupling the first arm with the second arm.” The limitation is unclear because the specification discloses “third arm 103 may be joined to the second arm 102 by a joint block 120” [0029], and “The joint block 120 may be fitted to the second arm 102 and the third arm 103” [0041]. The claim does not provide a discernible boundary for the claimed limitation, and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to draw a clear boundary between what is, and is not, covered by the claim. Appropriate correction is required. Claim(s) that depend(s) from the rejected claim(s) is/are rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by D1 (Nakanishi, US Pub. App. 2015-0321362). For claim 1, D1 discloses, in Figures 1-8, a robot comprising: a first arm (21); a second arm (31) rotatably coupled to the first arm (21); a sealing member (35) located between the first arm and the second arm; and a joint block (11) covering the sealing member, and coupling the first arm with the second arm (11 covers 21 and 31 via 22. Figure 2), wherein the first arm (21) comprises: a first housing (portion of 21 that accommodates a part of 31) providing an accommodating space and including one side open (Figure 2); and a first connecting mount (portion of 21 that receives 22) accommodated in the first housing and located at an opening of the first housing, wherein the second arm (31) comprises: a second housing (flange of 31) providing an accommodating space and including one side open; and a second connecting mount (radial extension of the flange of 31 that passes beyond the circumference of 31) accommodated in the second housing and joined to the first connecting mount at an opening of the second housing (The second connecting mount joined to first connecting mount via 22. Figure 2.), wherein the sealing member (35) is inserted between the first connecting mount and the second connecting mount (Figure 2), wherein the joint block (11) is engaged with the first connecting mount and the second connecting mount (Figure 2.) 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. Claim(s) 2-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 (Nakanishi, US Pub. App. 2015-0321362) in view of D2 (He et al., US Pub. App. 2018-0319012). For claim 2, D1 discloses the robot of claim 1, wherein the first connecting mount comprises: a bottom portion facing the second connecting mount (Figure 2); a cable hole penetrating a center of the bottom portion; and a plurality of pins located adjacent to the cable hole and protruded from the bottom portion, wherein the second connecting mount comprises: a dome portion facing the bottom portion; a cable hole penetrating a center of the dome portion; and a plurality of fixing grooves formed in a location corresponding to the plurality of pins, and recessed into the dome portion, wherein the plurality of pins is inserted into the plurality of fixing grooves. D2 does not disclose a robotic arm with hollow shaft and cables are passed through the hollow shaft. D2 teaches a robotic arm with hollow shaft 50 and cables are passed through the hollow shaft (Para. [0057]) providing an aesthetic view and facilitating the operation. D2 also discloses a plurality of screws (screw 54, Figure 10) (pins) and holes 26 (Para. [0057]) to facilitate assembly and dome 18. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify D1 with a cable hole and plurality of pins such that the plurality of pins located adjacent to the cable hole and protruded from the bottom portion, wherein the second connecting mount comprises: a dome portion facing the bottom portion; a cable hole penetrating a center of the dome portion; and a plurality of fixing grooves formed in a location corresponding to the plurality of pins, and recessed into the dome portion, wherein the plurality of pins is inserted into the plurality of fixing grooves, as taught by D2 with a reasonable expectation of success of providing means to cable to pass through and to facilitate the operation. For claim 3, D1 modified with D2 teaches the robot of claim 2, wherein one of the plurality of fixing grooves is an elongated hole (54, Figure 6.) For claim 4, D1 discloses the robot of claim 2, wherein the first connecting mount further comprises a first flange formed at a circumference of the bottom portion, wherein the second connecting mount further comprises a second flange formed at a circumference of the dome portion and facing the first flange, wherein the joint block is coupled to the first flange and the second flange (Figures 2, 4-5, and 7-8.) For claim 5, D1 discloses the robot of claim 4, wherein the sealing member (35) is inserted between the first flange and the second flange (Figures 2, 4-5, and 7-8.) For claim 6, D1 discloses the robot of claim 5, wherein the first flange comprises: a horizontal portion on which the sealing member is disposed (Figures 2, 4-5, and 7-8.); an inclined portion forming an acute angle with respect to the horizontal portion (Figures 2, 4-5, and 7-8.); and a curved portion connecting the horizontal portion and the inclined portion (Figures 2, 4-5, and 7-8.), wherein the second flange comprises: a horizontal portion facing the horizontal portion of the first flange, and being in contact with the sealing member; an inclined portion forming an acute angle with respect to the horizontal portion; and a curved portion connecting the horizontal portion and the inclined portion, wherein the joint block is in contact with the inclined portion of the first flange and the inclined portion of the second flange (Figures 2, 4-5, and 7-8.) For claim 7, D1 discloses the robot of claim 1, wherein the first connecting mount comprises: a bottom portion facing the second connecting mount (Figure 2); a cable hole penetrating a center of the bottom portion; and a plurality of pins located adjacent to the cable hole and protruded from the bottom portion, wherein the second connecting mount comprises: a dome portion facing the bottom portion; a cable hole penetrating a center of the dome portion; and a plurality of fixing grooves formed in a location corresponding to the plurality of pins, and recessed into the dome portion, wherein the plurality of pins is inserted into the plurality of fixing grooves. D2 does not disclose a robotic arm with hollow shaft and cables are passed through the hollow shaft. D2 teaches a robotic arm with hollow shaft 50 and cables are passed through the hollow shaft (Para. [0057]) providing an aesthetic view and facilitating the operation. D2 also discloses a plurality of screws (screw 54, Figure 10) (pins) and holes 26 (Para. [0057]) to facilitate assembly and dome 18. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify D1 with a cable hole and plurality of pins such that the plurality of pins located adjacent to the cable hole and protruded from the bottom portion, wherein the second connecting mount comprises: a dome portion facing the bottom portion; a cable hole penetrating a center of the dome portion; and a plurality of fixing grooves formed in a location corresponding to the plurality of pins, and recessed into the dome portion, wherein the plurality of pins is inserted into the plurality of fixing grooves, as taught by D2 with a reasonable expectation of success of providing means to cable to pass through and to facilitate the operation. For claim 8, D1 modified with D2 teaches the robot of claim 7, wherein the protrusion comprises: a first inclined portion extended from the bottom portion, and forming an incline with respect to the bottom portion; a top portion connected to the first inclined portion and forming a height of the protrusion; and a second inclined portion connected the bottom portion with the top portion, and being opposite to the first inclined portion with respect to the top portion, wherein the fixing groove comprises: a first side portion in contact with the first inclined portion of the protrusion; a second side portion in contact with the second inclined portion of the protrusion; and a lower portion spaced apart from the top portion of the protrusion with a gap (D2 teaches protrusion 54 and groove 26 in Figures 2 and 10. D1 modified with D2 teaches the claimed limitations.) For claim 9, D1 modified with D2 discloses the robot of claim 8, wherein the fixing groove further comprises an upper portion connected to the first side portion and the second side portion, and forming a circumference of the fixing groove, wherein the upper portion of the fixing groove is spaced apart from the bottom portion with a gap (D2 teaches groove 26 is spaced apart from the bottom portion. Figure 2. D1 modified with D2 teaches the claimed limitations.) For claim 10, D1 discloses the robot of claim 7, wherein the first connecting mount further comprises a first flange formed at a circumference of the bottom portion, wherein the second connecting mount further comprises a second flange formed at a circumference of the dome portion and facing the first flange, wherein the joint block is coupled to the first flange and the second flange (D2 teaches a dome 18. D1 modified with D2 teaches the claimed limitations.) For claim 11, D1 discloses the robot of claim 10, wherein the sealing member (35) is inserted between the first flange and the second flange (Figures 2, 4-5, and 7-8.) For claim 12, D1 discloses the robot of claim 11, wherein the first flange comprises: a horizontal portion on which the sealing member is disposed (Figures 2, 4-5, and 7-8.); an inclined portion forming an acute angle with respect to the horizontal portion (Figures 2, 4-5, and 7-8.); and a side portion connecting the horizontal portion and the inclined portion, wherein the second flange comprises: a horizontal portion facing the horizontal portion of the first flange, and being in contact with the sealing member (35); an inclined portion forming an acute angle with respect to the horizontal portion; and a side portion connecting the horizontal portion and the inclined portion, wherein the joint block is in contact with the inclined portion of the first flange and the inclined portion of the second flange (Figures 2, 4-5, and 7-8.) Conclusion Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and provides example of invention. A few of the prior art cited but not applied includes Tamura (US Pub. 2008-0258402); Bird (US Pub. 2018-0045345); and Kurebayashi (US 10,480,695). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN CUMAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3112. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, 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, KRISTINA FULTON can be reached at 571-272-7376. 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. /NATHAN CUMAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 10, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592110
OUTER ASSEMBLY OF ELECTRIC LOCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590638
Circumferential Sealing Assembly with Duct-Fed Hydrodynamic Grooves
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576792
CLAMP MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576997
DRONE ARM FOLDING/LOCKING MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577815
MOTOR VEHICLE AND USE OF A TRACTION BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+15.0%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1183 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month