DETAILED ACTION
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 1.84(l). The drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. The weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. This requirement applies to all lines however fine, to shading, and to lines representing cut surfaces in sectional views. Lines and strokes of different thicknesses may be used in the same drawing where different thicknesses have a different meaning.
Figs. 1-22 do not have satisfactory reproduction characteristics. The drawings appear to be multi-generation copies. The lines illustrating the invention, the reference numbers, and the leader lines are not all solid. Further, all of the figures (1-22) have very light reference numbers, leader lines, and actual lines defining the device. Still further Figs. 2, 3, 7-9, 11-12, and 14-18 illustrate some smaller/finer elements which are not clear due to the darkness of the elements.
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.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the first sentence repeats information given in the title and the second sentence is a single run-on sentence (i.e. not in narrative form) that appears to paraphrase the independent claim.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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 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 1-3, 11-12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (CN 214724250 – see IDS).
Please note that cited portions of Chen are from the Espacenet Translation provided in the IDS filed 8/20/2024.
Regarding claim 1: Chen discloses an anti-collision device (Fig. 1; page 2). Chen discloses that the anti-collision device 14, 15, 16 is configured to be mounted to a robot body (Figs. 1-3; page 4 – element 14 is removably attached). Chen discloses the anti-collision device comprising a first connecting member 12, 14 fixedly connecting to the robot body (Figs. 1-3; page 4). Chen discloses a working structure 15, 16, 17 provided on a side of the first connecting member away from the robot body (Figs. 1-3; pages3, 4). Chen discloses a first elastic member (springs – 18, 19, 25) arranged between the first connecting member and the working structure (Figs. 1-2, 4; page 3). Chen discloses that the first elastic member is configured to deform when the working structure is impacted (Figs. 1-2, 4; pages 3-4).
Regarding claim 2: Chen discloses that the working structure comprises a first substrate 15 and an impact guard 16 disposed on a side of the first substrate away from the first connecting member, the first substrate comprises a first arm 14, a mounting portion (not numbered but illustrated between arms 14), a second arm 14 arranged in sequence, at least one first elastic member 18 is provided, the at least one first elastic member elastically abuts between the mounting portion and the first connecting member, and the at least one first elastic member is disposed in a direction perpendicular to or intersecting with an extension direction of the first substrate, the first substrate being deflectable relative to the first connecting member (Fig. 2; pages 3-4).
Regarding claim 3: Chen discloses that two first elastic members are provided, the two first elastic members being arranged side by side along an extension direction of the working structure (Fig. 2; pages 3-4).
Regarding claim 11: Chen discloses that the working structure comprises a first substrate 15, an impact guard 16 connected to a first side of the first substrate, that the first connecting member is connected to a second side of the first substrate away from the impact guard, the first connecting member comprises two movable connecting portions disposed opposite each other, and the connecting portion is configured to be detachably mounted to the robot body (Figs. 2-4; pages 3-4).
Regarding claim 12: Chen discloses that the first connecting member further comprises a first bearing portion connected to the second side of the first substrate away from the impact guard and configured to bear the two movable connecting portions, and a first support, the first support being protrudingly provided on the first bearing portion in a direction away from the first substrate (Figs. 1-2; pages 3-4).
Regarding claim 18: Chen discloses a robot comprising an anti-collision device 14, 15, 16 and a robot body (Figs. 1-3; page 4). Chen discloses the anti-collision device being detachably mounted to the robot body (Figs. 1-3; page 4 – element 14 is removably attached). Chen discloses the anti-collision device comprising a first connecting member 12, 14, fixedly connecting to the robot body (Figs. 1-3; page 4). Chen discloses a working structure 15, 16, 17 provided on a side of the first connecting member away from the robot body (Figs. 1-3; pages3, 4). Chen discloses a first elastic member (springs – 18, 19, 25) arranged between the first connecting member and the working structure (Figs. 1-2, 4; page 3). Chen discloses that the first elastic member is configured to deform when the working structure is impacted (Figs. 1-2, 4; pages 3-4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-10, 13-17, and 19-20 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.
The popularity of robots is rising and their structure is well known in the arts. In particular, anti-collision devices and their structure are also well known in the art. Representative art which appears close to the claimed invention includes Chen et al. (CN 214724250 – see IDS), Shin et al. (US 20140138964), TCL TECHNOLOGY (CN 210990011 - see IDS), Park et al. (US 20240286285), Muneto (US 10442080), Huang et al. (US 20250138548), Kim et al. (US 20240041293), Huang et al. (US 20230346178), Deng (US 20230175279), Zhou et al. (US 20210141387), and Yan (US 20200264624). In general, this art, alone or in combination, discloses various recited features, including but not limited to, an anti-collision device configured to be mounted to a robot body, the anti-collision device comprising a first connecting member, fixedly connecting to the robot body, a working structure provided on a side of the first connecting member away from the robot body, a first elastic member arranged between the first connecting member and the working structure, and that the first elastic member is configured to deform when the working structure is impacted. Thus, upon reviewing these cited publications, and their included references, it appears that the claimed subject matter might teach a generally known concept. However, this art fails to disclose or fairly suggest the specifically recited structural components of the anti-collision device. Specifically, the art does not disclose the various detailed structures and positional relationships between the structures, the robot body, and the anti-collision device, and the overall relationship to the robot when combined as claimed with the independent claims. It could be argued that the individual structure is generally known in the art and thus, could just be assembled to disclose the claimed invention. However, the instant invention clearly and specifically recites structural relationships and combinations, which require a greater effort than just cobbling together known structures. Further, the claimed structures are sufficiently detailed to be distinguishable when configured as claimed. The examiner can find no motivation to combine or modify the references which would define a fully functioning apparatus as claimed in the instant application. Thus, it would not have been within routine skill to glean the specifically combined limitations of the instant invention, from the art, without the benefit of hindsight reasoning or extensive experimentation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TARAS P BEMKO whose telephone number is (571)270-1830. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00 (EDT/EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicole Coy can be reached on 571-272-5405. 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. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/Taras P Bemko/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
5/5/2026
Prosecution Insights