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 .
This communication is responsive to the Application No. 18/802,551 and the preliminary amendment filed on filled on 09/04/024.
Claims 1-18 are presented for examination.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 2 the limitation “the controller is operable to receive…” should apparent be “the controller is [[operable] configured to receive…”. Otherwise it would not be given a patentable weight for an intended usage. Claims 3-6 are also objected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Examiner's Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs/ columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in 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. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicants' definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
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.
Claims 1-7, 10-11 and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chalofsky et al. (US 2021/0347058) (hereinafter Chalofsky).
Claim 1. Chalofsky teaches a tire-changing and balancing workstation (See Figs. 1B-2A) comprising:
a tire changer (See Fig. 2A, “tire changing station 182”) for mounting a tire on a wheel, to thereby create a wheel and tire assembly (See Fig. 2A, Para. [0075], discloses “mount tire 111N on wheel 11W in tire changing machine 182, and create wheel and tire assembly 111”);
a wheel balancer (See Fig. 2A, “tire balancing machine 183” construed as wheel balancer as claimed) for balancing the wheel and tire assembly (See Fig. 2A, Para. [0086], “the bot 120 transfers the wheel assembly 111 from the tire changing machine 182 to the tire balancing machine 183 for balancing the wheel assembly 111 [construed as wheel and tire assembly]”, see Para. [0061], discloses “the wheel assembly 111 [e.g., the wheel 111W, tire 111T, valve stem 2100, valve stem cap 2101, etc.)”);
a robot (See Figs. 1B-2A, bot 120) having:
a manipulator, the manipulator having a wrist (See Fig. 1B-2A, Para. [0087], discloses “robotic arm 126 with tool 129, and/or tend effector 128) and a gripper connected to the wrist (see Para. [0043], “tool 129 includes one or more of a wheel assembly grip 129A”), the gripper being operable to grip the wheel and tire assembly (See Para. [0043], [0045], “a wheel assembly grip 129A has any suitable configuration for gripping the wheels assembly 111 [construed as wheel and tire assembly]”); and
a controller connected to the manipulator (See Fig. 1B, “controller 160 is connected to bot 120”), wherein the manipulator is placed within reach of both the tire changer and the wheel balancer so as to grip and transfer the wheel and tire assembly in a transfer operation from the tire changer to the wheel balancer (See Para. [0086], Fig. 2A, discloses “See Fig. 2A, Para. [0087], “the bot 120 transfers the wheel assembly 111 from the tire changing machine 182 to the tire balancing machine 183 for balancing the wheel assembly 111 [construed as wheel and tire assembly]””)
Claim 2. Chalofsky teaches the tire-changing and balancing workstation of claim 1, wherein the controller is connected to the tire changer, the controller being operable to send a first signal to the manipulator to pick up the wheel and tire assembly once a tire-mounting operation is completed (See Para. [0043], “the bot 120 includes a controller 160 that is configured to command the at least one robotic arm 126, for performing a subsequent step in the tire change process”, and see Para. [0058], “the controller 160 (including suitable processors and memory 161 for controlling operations of the bot 120”, and see Para. [0087], “the bot 120 transfers the wheel assembly 111 from the tire changing machine 182 to the tire balancing machine 183”, where in para. [0045], [0219], discloses “a wheel assembly grip has any suitable configuration for gripping the wheels assembly 111”, which constitutes the same claim invention and where one of the bot command is construed as first signal).
Claim 3. Chalofsky teaches the tire-changing and balancing workstation of claim 2, wherein the controller is operable to receive a second signal from the tire changer that the tire-mounting operation is completed (See Para. [0029], discloses “The process monitor module 1007 is configured to monitor (e.g., by sending data to and receiving data from the devices 1020A-1020n indicating a tire change process has started, has ended) the tire changing process as described herein and provide feedback to the process control module 1008”, and see Para. [0087], “the bot 120 transfers the wheel assembly 111 from the tire changing machine 182 to the tire balancing machine 183” which constitutes the same claim invention even it doesn’t explicitly spell out second signal, however, in para. [0060], discloses “The vision system 162, of the automated tire changing system 100, informs and enables the controller 160 so as to provide, real time command inputs to the bot(s) 120 that are responsive, in real time to variances in vehicle 110 position, variances in wheel assembly 111 (and components thereof as described herein) position, variances in tire 111T position, variances in wheel position 111W, and variances in positions other features of the automated tire changing system 100 (referred to herein as “tire changing variances”) so that the bot(s) 120 is/are adaptive in real time resolving tire changing variances, affecting the tire changing process”).
Claim 4. Chalofsky teaches the tire-changing and balancing workstation of claim 2, wherein the controller is further connected to the wheel balancer, the controller being operable to send a third signal to the wheel-balancer once the transfer operation by the manipulator is completed (See Para. [0029], discloses “The process monitor module 1007 is configured to monitor (e.g., by sending data to and receiving data from the devices 1020A-1020n indicating a tire change process has started, has ended) the tire changing process as described herein and provide feedback to the process control module 1008”, and see Para. [0087], “The bot 120 transfers the balanced wheel assembly 111 to the vehicle 110 and installs the wheel assembly 111 to the vehicle 110” which constitutes the same claim invention even it doesn’t explicitly spell out third signal”. Additionally, see Para. [0043], “the bot 120 includes a controller 160 that is configured to command the at least one robotic arm 126, for performing a subsequent step in the tire change process”, where one of the bot commands is construed as third signal as claim).
Claim 5. Chalofsky teaches the tire-changing and balancing workstation of claim 4, wherein the controller is operable to receive a fourth signal from the wheel balancer that a wheel balancing operation is completed See Para. [0029], discloses “The process monitor module 1007 is configured to monitor (e.g., by sending data to and receiving data from the devices 1020A-1020n indicating a tire change process has started, has ended) the tire changing process as described herein and provide feedback to the process control module 1008”, and see Para. [0087], “the bot 120 transfers the wheel assembly 111 from the tire changing machine 182 to the tire balancing machine 183”, and see Para. [0087], “The bot 120 transfers the balanced wheel assembly 111 to the vehicle 110 and installs the wheel assembly 111 to the vehicle 110”, which constitutes the same claim invention even it doesn’t explicitly spell out fourth signal, however, in para. [0060], discloses “The vision system 162, of the automated tire changing system 100, informs and enables the controller 160 so as to provide, real time command inputs to the bot(s) 120 that are responsive, in real time to variances in vehicle 110 position, variances in wheel assembly 111 (and components thereof as described herein) position, variances in tire 111T position, variances in wheel position 111W, and variances in positions other features of the automated tire changing system 100 (referred to herein as “tire changing variances”) so that the bot(s) 120 is/are adaptive in real time resolving tire changing variances, affecting the tire changing process”).
Claim 6. Chalofsky teaches the tire-changing and balancing workstation of claim 5, wherein the controller is operable to send a fifth signal to the manipulator to remove the wheel and tire assembly from the wheel balancer in a removal operation (See Para. [0043], “the bot 120 includes a controller 160 that is configured to command the at least one robotic arm 126, for performing a subsequent step in the tire change process”, and see para. [0087], discloses “The bot 120 transfers the balanced wheel assembly 111 from tire balancing machine [construed as wheel balancer], which constitutes the claimed invention even the cited prior art doesn’t explicitly spell out fifth signal, but one of the bot commands is construed as fifth signal as claim).
Claim 7. Chalofsky teaches the tire-changing and balancing workstation of claim 1, further comprising a camera for detecting at least one of a position of the wheel and tire assembly, a position of the wheel, a size of the wheel, a size of the tire, a shape of the wheel, a shape of the tire, a completion status of the wheel and tire assembly and a balancing status of the wheel and tire assembly (See Para. [0065], discloses “at least one of the vision systems 130, 162 is configured to identify tire size”).
Claim 10. Chalofsky discloses a method of manipulating a wheel and tire assembly in a tire-changing and balancing workstation, the wheel and tire assembly being made of a tire mounted on a wheel (See Para. [0075], Fig. 2A, discloses “an automated tire balancing machine 183 where the bot 120 is configured to remove wheel assembly 111 from vehicle and transport it to the tire changing machine 182, where the tire 111T, i.e., old/used tire is removed from wheel 111W and installed a new tire 111N to the wheel 111W by the bot 120, and robotic arm 126 is configured to place the wheel 111W with the new tire 111TN mounted thereto, on the automated tire balancing machine 183 for balancing”), the method comprising:
transferring the wheel and tire assembly from a tire changer to a wheel balancer using a manipulator (See Fig. 2A, Para. [0075], discloses “robotic arm 126 is configured to transport wheel 111W with the new tire mounted thereto, from Tire Changing Machine 182 to Tire Balancing Machine 182”, and/or see Para. [0087], “the bot 120 transfers the wheel assembly 111 from the tire changing machine 182 to the tire balancing machine 183”, same as claimed).
Claim 11. Chalofsky teaches the method of claim 10, further comprising at least one activity selected from the group of activities consisting of:
securing the wheel on the tire changer using the manipulator (Optional claimed feature, and a prior art citation is not required);
releasing the wheel from the tire changer using the manipulator (See Para, [0087], discloses “the bot 120 transfers the wheel assembly 111 from the tire changing machine 182 to the tire balancing machine 183”, which constitutes the claimed feature of releasing the wheel from the changer using bot 120, i.e., manipulator);
securing the wheel on the wheel balancer using the manipulator Optional claimed feature, and a prior art citation is not required); and
releasing the wheel from the wheel balancer using the manipulator (See Para. [0087], Fig. 2A, discloses “The bot 120 transfers the balanced wheel assembly 111 from Tire Balancing Machine 183 to the vehicle 110”, which constitutes the claimed feature releasing the wheel from wheel balancer).
Claim 13. Chalofsky teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the transferring comprises gripping the wheel and tire assembly from the tire changer using a gripper connected to a wrist of the manipulator (See Para. [0042]-[0043], Fig. 1 and/or Fig. 2A, discloses “The robotic arm has an end effector 128 that includes a wheel or tire engagement tool 129 disposed so that articulation of the at least one robotic arm 126 with the bot arm degree of freedom effects engagement contact of the wheel or tire engagement tool 129 and a wheel 111W. In the present disclosure the wheel or tire engagement tool 129 includes one or more of a wheel assembly grip 129A”, and in Para. [0087], discloses “the bot 120 is configured to transfer wheel assembly from tire changing machine 182 to tire balancing machine 182”).
Claim 14. Chalofsky teaches the method of claim 13, further comprising removing the wheel and tire assembly in a balanced state from the wheel balancer using the manipulator (See (See Para. [0042]-[0043], Fig. 1 and/or Fig. 2A, discloses “The robotic arm has an end effector 128 that includes a wheel or tire engagement tool 129 disposed so that articulation of the at least one robotic arm 126 with the bot arm degree of freedom effects engagement contact of the wheel or tire engagement tool 129 and a wheel 111W. In the present disclosure the wheel or tire engagement tool 129 includes one or more of a wheel assembly grip 129A”, and in Para. [0087], discloses “The bot 120 transfers the balanced wheel assembly 111 to the vehicle 110”, hence removing the wheel and tire assembly in a balanced state from the wheel balancer using the manipulator).
Claim 15. Chalofsky teaches the method of claim 10, further comprising detecting a size of at least one of a tire or of a wheel of the wheel and tire assembly (See Para. [0065], discloses “identify tire size”).
Claim 16. Chalofsky teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the detecting is done using a camera (See Para. [0065], discloses “at least one of the vision systems 130, 162 is configured to identify tire size”).
Claim 17. Chalofsky teaches the method of claim 10 further comprising:
mounting of the tire on the wheel to create the wheel and tire assembly using the tire changer (See Fig. 2A, Para. [0075], discloses “tire changer machine 182 to mount tire 111N on wheel 11W); and
balancing the wheel and tire assembly using the wheel balancer (See Fig. 2A, Para. [0087], “the bot 120 transfers the wheel assembly 111 from the tire changing machine 182 to the tire balancing machine 183 for balancing the wheel assembly 111 [construed as wheel and tire assembly]”, see Para. [0061], discloses “the wheel assembly 111 [e.g., the wheel 111W, tire 111T, valve stem 2100, valve stem cap 2101, etc.)”).
Claim 18. Chalofsky teaches the method of claim 17, further comprising:
detecting completion of a mounting of the tire on the wheel (See Para. [0029], discloses “The process monitor module 1007 is configured to monitor (e.g., by sending data to and receiving data from the devices 1020A-1020n indicating a tire change process has started, has ended) the tire changing process as described herein and provide feedback to the process control module 1008”, same as claimed); and
detecting completion of a balancing of the wheel and tire assembly (See Para. [0029], discloses “The process monitor module 1007 is configured to monitor (e.g., by sending data to and receiving data from the devices 1020A-1020n indicating a tire change process has started, has ended) the tire changing process as described herein and provide feedback to the process control module 1008”, where in Para. [0075] and [0087], discloses one of the tire changing process is balancing of the wheel and tire assembly at tire balancing machine 183”), same as claimed).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 8-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chalofsky et al. (US 2021/0347058) (hereinafter Chalofsky) in view of Rogalla et al. (US 2012/0267055) (hereinafter Rogalla).
Claim 12. Chalofsky teaches the method of claim 11, where the tool being connected to the wrist of the manipulator (see in Para. [0075], discloses “The end effector 128, with the wheel or tire engagement tool 129 coupled thereto, on articulation of the at least one robotic arm 126 is configured to place the wheel 111W, with the other tire 111TN mounted thereto, but the teaching of Chalofsky doesn’t explicitly spell out wherein the securing and releasing the wheel are performed using a tool adapted to manipulate a securing device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Rogalla teaches, wherein the securing and releasing the wheel are performed using a tool adapted to manipulate a securing device (See Para. [0010], [0043], discloses “a mounting station, which is arranged in the working region of the handling device and comprises gripping means [i.e., manipulator] for releasably holding a rim of the wheel [construed as securing and releasing the wheel as claimed]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified the teaching of Chalofsky with a gripper means, i.e., claimed manipulator as taught by Rogalla in order to releasable hold the wheel to reduce a risk of damage to the rim/wheel and/or tire bead.
Claim 8 is a tire-changing and balancing workstation corresponding to method claim 12 and having substantially the same technical features as claim 12, differing only in the category of invention. Therefore, the claim 8 is rejected for the same rationales set forth as above for claim 12.
Claim 9. The teaching of Chalofsky as modified by the teaching of Rogalla teaches the tire-changing and balancing workstation of claim 8 further comprising a tool rack adapted for storing the gripper and the tool (See Chalofsky, at least Para. [0069]-[0071], [0074], [0078], Fig. 2A, discloses “tire storage racks/carts 187”, same as claimed).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Merg et al. (US 2017/0286888 A1) (hereinafter Merg), discloses, “Technician Timer”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to B M M HANNAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0237. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY-FRIDAY at 8:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Adam Mott can be reached at 5712705376. 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.
/B M M HANNAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657