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 .
INFORMATION DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11 July 2024 and 04 June 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDSs have been considered by the Examiner herein.
CLAIM STATUS
Claims 1-8 were originally filed.
Claims 4 and 6-7 are currently amended.
INITIAL REMARKS
Applicant is reminded that in order to be entitled to reconsideration or further examination, the Applicant or patent owner must reply to the Office action. The reply by the Applicant or patent owner must be reduced to a writing which distinctly and specifically points out the supposed errors in the examiner' s action and must reply to every ground of objection and rejection in the prior Office action. The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. If the reply is with respect to an application, a request may be made that objections or requirements as to form not necessary to further consideration of the claims, be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated. The Applicant's or patent owner's reply must appear throughout to be a bona fide attempt to advance the application or the reexamination proceeding to final action. A general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section.
Should the Applicant believe that a telephone conference would expedite the prosecution of the instant application, Applicant is invited to call the Examiner.
CLAIM REJECTIONS - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujita et al., JP2019095318A (“FUJITA”).
Re claim 1, FUJITA discloses a force detection device comprising:
a first attachment part fixed to a first surface to be attached [0023];
a second attachment part fixed to a second surface to be attached, a load fluctuation of which is larger than that of the first surface to be attached [0023];
a force sensor body fixed between the first attachment part and the second attachment part [0023],
wherein the first attachment part comprises a planar or flange-shaped first portion fixed to one end surface of the force sensor body, a columnar second portion, one end of which is connected to the first portion on an opposite side from the force sensor body, and a third portion that is provided at another end of the second portion and is fixed to the first surface to be attached [0008], [0022],
a gap in an axial direction of the second portion is formed between the first portion and the third portion [0008-0009], and
the second attachment part is formed in a shape of a plane fixed to another end surface of the force sensor body, the plane having a higher stiffness than the third portion [0009], [0035].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 are allowed.
Claims 2-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Re claim 7, Applicant' s claims encompasses an invention that the prior art does not disclose, teach, or otherwise render obvious. More specifically, Applicant recites a robot integrating a force detection device configured in a particular manner.
As best understood within the context of Applicant' s claimed invention as a whole, these limitations do not appear to be disclosed, taught, nor otherwise rendered obvious by the prior art.
For example, Fujita et al. (JP2019095318A, “FUJITA”) discloses a force detecting device and robot (same applicant). However, FUJITA, as best understood by the Examiner, fails to disclose, teach, or otherwise render obvious the particular claim limitations highlighted above, in view of the claimed invention as a whole.
Furthermore, Nagura (WO2019078315A1, “NAGURA”) discloses a similar robot equipped with a force sensor. However, like FUJITA, NAGURA, as best understood by the Examiner, fails to disclose, teach, or otherwise render obvious the particular claim limitations highlighted above, in view of the claimed invention as a whole.
Further still, Sato (US20160089789, “SATO”) discloses another robot system with a force detection unit. However, like FUJITA and NAGURA, SATO, as best understood by the Examiner, fails to disclose, teach, or otherwise render obvious the particular claim limitations highlighted above, in view of the claimed invention as a whole.
Accordingly, independent claim 7 is deemed allowable over the prior art. Dependent claim 8 is allowable based at least on its dependency to claim 7. Objected claims 2-6 contain the same or substantially the same allowable features as claims 7-8.
Any comments considered necessary by Applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance”.
RELEVANT PRIOR ART
The Examiner would like to make Applicant aware of prior art references, not relied upon in this action, but pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure. They are as follows:
US20220305666, Jiang et al. – robot gripper with force detection device
JP2019113459A, Nakayama – robot with integrated strain sensor
JP2018080941A, Inoue et al. – force detection apparatus and robot
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS M HAMMOND III whose telephone number is 571-272-2215. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 0800-1700.
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached on 571-272-2375. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. For more information about the PAIR system, see: https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair.
Respectfully,
/Thomas M Hammond III/Primary Examiner, GAU 2855
Prosecution Insights