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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
A vacuum pump (claim 7)
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 2-5 and 8-11 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.
What is the relationship between the “a magnetic force” introduced in claim 3, line 3, claim 3, line 2, claim 4, line 3, and the “a magnetic force” introduced in claim 1, line 7? What structure is being claimed?
What is the relationship between the “a magnetic force” introduced in claim 8, line 3, claim 9, line 2, claim 10, line 2, and the “a magnetic force” introduced in claim 5, line 5? What structure is being claimed?
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Tsuji, JP 2018027578.
PNG
media_image1.png
674
796
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 1, 6-7, Tsuji discloses a gripping device (1), comprising: a bag body (4) that comes into contact with a workpiece (W) that is a magnetic body (heavy metal plate member), the bag body (4) having flexibility and airtightness (see abstract) and accommodating a granular material (5); an intake and exhaust unit (7) that deforms (see fig 2a-2b) the bag body (4) to follow a shape (see fig 2) of the workpiece (W), by discharging gas (via ejector 10) from the bag body (3) to the bag body (4), when the bag body (4) comes into contact (see fig 2b) with the workpiece (W); and a magnetic attraction unit (8) that grips the workpiece (W) by applying a magnetic force (shown in fig 2c) to the workpiece (W) in a state where the bag body (4) is deformed (see fig 2b-2c) to follow the shape of the workpiece (W).
Regarding claims 2 and 8, Tsuji discloses the gripping device (1) according to claims 1 and 7, wherein: the granular material (5) is a magnetic powder (“magnetic powder”); and the magnetic attraction unit (8) applies a magnetic force (via 21) to the workpiece (W) via the granular material (5).
Regarding claims 3 and 9, Tsuji discloses the gripping device (1) according to claims 1 and 7, wherein the magnetic attraction unit (8) applies a magnetic force (as described above) to the workpiece (W) after deforming the bag body (4) to follow the shape (see fig 2b-2c) of the workpiece (W).
Regarding claims 4 and 10, Tsuji discloses the gripping device (1) according to claims 1 and 7, wherein the magnetic attraction unit (8) is configured to switch between a gripping state (see fig 2c) in which the workpiece (W) is gripped by a magnetic force (as described above) and a release state (turn off 21 to release) in which gripping is released.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 11 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 5 and 11 are patentable over the prior art of record because the teachings of the references taken as a whole do not show or render obvious the combination set forth in claims 5 and 11, including every structural element recited in the claims, especially, the configuration wherein the magnetic attraction unit includes, a magnet installed inside a housing, and a switching unit / electric actuator in the housing that moves the magnet closer to the workpiece to bring the magnetic attraction unit into the gripping state, and moves the magnet away from the workpiece to bring the magnetic attraction unit to the release state.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the gripping system as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the system in the manner required by the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A RIEGELMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7956. The examiner can normally be reached 8-6 EST Monday - Friday.
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, Robert Hodge can be reached at (571) 272-2097. 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.
MICHAEL A. RIEGELMAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3654
/MICHAEL A RIEGELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights