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 .
Status of claims
The following claims have been rejected or allowed for the following reasons:
Claim(s) 11 - 21 is rejected under 35 USC § 103.
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on July 20, 2026, has been entered.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. DE10 2022 108 243.1, filed on 4/6/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement/statements (IDS) were filed on 9/20/24. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 11 - Control Interface
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 11-15 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Guerin (US 20180311831 A1), in further view of Riedel (EP 3081347 B1).
Regarding claim 11 Guerin teaches A robot add-on part, comprising: a casing; a coupling arranged on the casing and designed for releasable coupling in a form-fitting manner to at least one counter-coupling provided on an outer surface of a link of a robot; (Guerin figures 1A and 1B depict a rigid robotic end effector that is designed to be attached, detached or swapped from a robotic arm.);
PNG
media_image1.png
395
285
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Guerin Figures 1A, 1B
wherein the coupling is designed, in a state coupled to the link of the robot via coupling with the corresponding counter-coupling, to position and orient the robot add- on part relative to the link of the robot with a position and orientation accuracy sufficient for the positioning accuracy of the robot; (Guerin [0021] reads “Adaptive robotic retooling apparatus and methods, embodiments of which are described herein, solve several problems that are typical of outfitting a robot in a robotic system with different robotic peripherals (e.g., tools, sensors, end effectors, etc.) to allow the robot to successfully and safely perform actions with the robotic peripherals in the physical world. One, the robotic peripherals must be attached to the robot in a repeatable and rigid manner. This is required so that an attached robotic peripheral does not move or come loose while the robot performs actions with the attached robotic peripheral. Two, the physical properties of the attached robotic peripheral, such as its mass, center of mass, moment of inertia, shape, physical extent, interaction or grasping point, must be programmed into the robotic system. The size information is required so that interaction point of the attached robotic peripheral as well as its shape and extent can be factored into calculations for kinematic movement, collision detection, and other motion calculations.”);
at least one control component arranged on the casing or in the casing, the at least one control component comprising a data memory in which physical data of the robot add-on part are stored; (Guerin [0039] reads “Peripheral adapter 420 includes a communication device 426, which is communicatively linked to a data storage unit 428 that is programmable to store a peripheral profile of the robotic peripheral designated for peripheral adapter 420. … Data storage unit 428 includes a non-volatile, computer-readable storage medium mounted on a substrate (e.g., a circuit board) or embedded in the structure of peripheral adapter 420 in a protected fashion.” And [0023] reads “Peripheral adapter 120 can be programmed to store at least one peripheral profile containing information associated with robotic peripheral 80, such as a set of physical properties of robotic peripheral 80 (e.g., unique identifier, name, model, type, relative mounting offset, size, mass, shape, physical extent, type and/or location of attachment sites 82, etc.),”);
a control interface designed and configured to transmit the physical data of the robot add-on part present in the data memory to a control device of the robot when the robot add-on part is coupled to the link of; (Guerin [0019] reads “When the programmable peripheral adapter is detachably connects the robotic peripheral to the robot, the programmable peripheral adapter can communicate with the robotic system and provide the robotic system with useful information, which the robotic system uses to reconfigure the robot, update operating characteristics of the robot, and/or communicate with and operate the robotic peripheral.”);
Guerin does not teach at least one input feature communicating with the control device of the robot via the control interface, the at least one input feature configured for actuation by a user to control operation of the [[robot]] robot only when the robot add-on part is coupled to the link of the robot.
Riedel in analogous art, teaches at least one input feature communicating with the control device of the robot via the control interface, the at least one input feature configured for actuation by a user to control operation of the [[robot]] robot only when the robot add-on part is coupled to the link of the robot. (Riedel page 3 paragraph 11 reads “In general, at least one mechanical connection between the robot hand-held device and the electronically communicating device is provided by the plug connection means according to the invention. The robot hand-held device, in turn, is generally connected in terms of control technology to a robot controller, such that the robot controller is actuated by operating the safety basic control device of the robot operator's handset in order, for example, to move the robot arm or a mobile robot platform in a controlled manner”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Guerin with that of Riedel to include a method in which the add on device could control the robot. Doing so would constitute the combination of known methods to yield predictable results since both interchangeable robotic peripherals and remote control devices for robotic systems would be known to one with ordinary skill in the art. Similarly, their combination would yield the desired and predictable result of an attachable system for controlling a robot.
Regarding claim 12 Guerin/Riedel teaches The robot add-on part of claim 11, wherein the data memory is adapted to store physical data in the form of at least one of: geometry data, center of gravity data, load data, or machine data of the robot add-on part. (Guerin [0019] reads “The embedded storage unit can also store information associated with the programmable peripheral adapter itself, such as physical properties (e.g., a unique identifier, mass, center of mass, thickness, shape, physical extent, type and/or location of one or more attachment points, and the like) of the programmable peripheral adapter, one or more images representative of the peripheral adapter, and the like.”);
Regarding claim 13 Guerin/Riedel teaches The robot add-on part of claim 11, further comprising a sensor assigned to the coupling, the sensor: configured to detect a proper coupling state of the coupling to the counter- coupling provided on the link of the robot; (Guerin [0027] reads “The connection monitor can include a mechanical sensor that senses when peripheral flange 122 and robotic flange 132 are mated and/or when connector 110 is installed to mechanically connect peripheral adapter 120 to robotic adapter 130.”);
and configured to permit transmission of the physical data from the data memory to the control device of the robot when a proper coupling state of the coupling to the counter-coupling is detected by the sensor. (Guerin [0028] reads “When the connection monitor detects a detachable connection forming between peripheral adapter 120 and robotic adapter 130, robotic retooling apparatus 100 generates at least one connection event and establishes a communication link between peripheral adapter 120 and robotic adapter 130. … Subsequent to establishing the communication link, a tool manager (not shown) running on the robotic system or robotic retooling apparatus 100 queries peripheral adapter 120, which then obtains profile information in a stored peripheral profile of robotic peripheral 80 and provides the profile information to robot 90 and/or the robotic system. The profile information associated with robotic peripheral 80 includes physical properties of robotic peripheral 80, such as the mass, center of mass, moment of inertia, shape, physical extent, interaction or grasping point, or required drivers and any other pertinent information that enable robot 90 to use robotic peripheral 80. The tool manager can also query peripheral adapter 120 for profile information in one or more stored adapter profiles of connector 110, peripheral adapter 120, and/or robotic adapter 130.”);
Regarding claim 14 Guerin/Riedel teaches The robot add-on part of claim 11, wherein: the control interface comprises an electrical connector integrated into the coupling; (Guerin [0025] reads “Robotic adapter 130 attaches to robot 90 at a connection site 92 of robot 90 and includes a communication device (not shown) that communicatively links with the communication device of peripheral adapter 120 via a physical connection (e.g., connectors, wired connections, spring contacts, etc.)”);
the electrical connector configured to pass physical data stored in the memory to the control device by an electrical connection routed via the electrical connector when the robot add-on part is coupled to the link of the robot. (Guerin [0019] reads “When the programmable peripheral adapter is detachably connects the robotic peripheral to the robot, the programmable peripheral adapter can communicate with the robotic system and provide the robotic system with useful information, which the robotic system uses to reconfigure the robot, update operating characteristics of the robot, and/or communicate with and operate the robotic peripheral.”);
Regarding claim 15 Guerin/Riedel teaches The robot add-on part of claim 11, wherein the control interface comprises a transmitting device that is part of a wireless connection that operatively connects the control component of the robot add-on part to the control device of the robot. (Guerin [0025] reads “Robotic adapter 130 attaches to robot 90 at a connection site 92 of robot 90 and includes a communication device (not shown) that communicatively links with the communication device of peripheral adapter 120 via a physical connection (e.g., connectors, wired connections, spring contacts, etc.), a wireless connection (e.g., Bluetooth, near-field communication (“NFC”), WiFi, RF, optical, etc.), or other means, such as via detectable changes in one or more physical properties (e.g., capacitance, resistance, magnetic field, etc.).”);
Regarding claim 17 Guerin/Riedel teaches The robot add-on part of claim 11, wherein the robot add-on part is designed as at least one of a manual operating device, a safety emergency switching device, a sensor, or a camera. (Riedel page 2 paragraph 15 reads “The robot hand-held device can in particular be a hand-held robot programming device. The robot hand-held device can also be or be referred to as a manipulator handheld device. The mechanically connecting plug connection means is designed for the manual connection of the robot hand-held device to the respective electronically communicating device. … Thus, a user, such as a robot programmer, can manually release or connect the robotic hand-held device to the electronically-communicating device without the need for tools. The holder is so far for manually releasable, tool-free mechanical coupling of the housing to a different from the robot control handset, electronically communicating with the safety control device ground device formed.”);
Regarding claim 18 Guerin/Riedel teaches A system, comprising: a control device for controlling a robot arm; the control device designed and configured to control electric drive motors of the robot arm, which drive motors move respective joints of the robot arm in order to adjust links of the robot arm relative to one another, either automatically according to a robot program implemented on the control device, or in a manual drive mode by manual control, whereby the robot arm is movable into different poses; (Riedel page 3 paragraph 11 reads “In general, at least one mechanical connection between the robot hand-held device and the electronically communicating device is provided by the plug connection means according to the invention. The robot hand-held device, in turn, is generally connected in terms of control technology to a robot controller, such that the robot controller is actuated by operating the safety basic control device of the robot operator's handset in order, for example, to move the robot arm or a mobile robot platform in a controlled manner”);
the control device comprising an input interface; (Riedel page 4 paragraph 1 reads “Thus, it is also possible to control basic control functions of the robot mechanically by means of input means of the robot control handset. This can be in particular the already mentioned emergency stop triggering means, the approval device and / or the mode selection means. In addition, further possibly non-secure input means and / or display means may be provided on the robot hand-held device. These may be, for example, one or more displays, light sources, switches, buttons, in particular for menu control and for triggering a touch-up and / or start / stop buttons.”);
and a robot add-on part according to claim 11 operatively coupled with the input interface via the control interface of the robot add-on part, to thereby transmit physical data from the data memory to the control device. (Guerin [0019] reads “When the programmable peripheral adapter is detachably connects the robotic peripheral to the robot, the programmable peripheral adapter can communicate with the robotic system and provide the robotic system with useful information, which the robotic system uses to reconfigure the robot, update operating characteristics of the robot, and/or communicate with and operate the robotic peripheral.”);
Regarding claim 19 Guerin/Riedel teaches A robot, comprising: a robot arm with a plurality of links connected by a plurality of joints, wherein the links are adjustable relative to one another by movement of the joints driven by respective electric motors controlled by a control device; (Riedel page 6 paragraph 3 and 4 reads “The robot arm 2 is movable by means of three electric drive motors 11 in its three basic axes and by means of three further electric drive motors 11 in its three hand axes. The robot controller 12 of the robot 1 is configured to execute a robot program by which the joints 14 of the robot arm 2 can be automated according to the robot program or automatically adjusted or rotated in a hand-held operation. For this purpose, the robot controller 12 is connected to the controllable electric drive motors 11, which are designed to adjust the joints 14 of the robot arm 2. With the robot controller 12, an inventive robot control pendant 15 is connected control technology.”);
at least one of the links of the robot arm including at least one counter-coupling configured for coupling with a robot add-on part; and at least one robot add-on part according to claim 11 coupled with the at least one counter-coupling. (Guerin figures 1A and 1B depict a rigid robotic end effector that is designed to be attached, detached or swapped from a robotic arm.);
PNG
media_image1.png
395
285
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Guerin Figures 1A, 1B
Regarding claim 20 Guerin/Riedel teaches A method for controlling electric motors of a robot arm, which motors drive joints of the robot arm in order to move links of the robot arm relative to one another in order to move the robot arm into different poses, the method comprising: attaching a robot add-on part according to claim 11 to a link of the robot arm by connecting, in a form-fitting manner, the coupling of the robot add-on part to a counter- coupling on the link of the robot arm; (Guerin figures 1A and 1B depict a rigid robotic end effector that is designed to be attached, detached or swapped from a robotic arm.);
PNG
media_image1.png
395
285
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Guerin Figures 1A, 1B
automatic transmitting physical data from the data memory of the robot add-on part to a control device designed (Guerin [0039] reads “Peripheral adapter 420 includes a communication device 426, which is communicatively linked to a data storage unit 428 that is programmable to store a peripheral profile of the robotic peripheral designated for peripheral adapter 420. … Data storage unit 428 includes a non-volatile, computer-readable storage medium mounted on a substrate (e.g., a circuit board) or embedded in the structure of peripheral adapter 420 in a protected fashion.” And [0023] reads “Peripheral adapter 120 can be programmed to store at least one peripheral profile containing information associated with robotic peripheral 80, such as a set of physical properties of robotic peripheral 80 (e.g., unique identifier, name, model, type, relative mounting offset, size, mass, shape, physical extent, type and/or location of attachment sites 82, etc.),”);
and configured to control the electric motors of the robot arm; (Riedel page 6 paragraph 3 and 4 reads “The robot arm 2 is movable by means of three electric drive motors 11 in its three basic axes and by means of three further electric drive motors 11 in its three hand axes. The robot controller 12 of the robot 1 is configured to execute a robot program by which the joints 14 of the robot arm 2 can be automated according to the robot program or automatically adjusted or rotated in a hand-held operation. For this purpose, the robot controller 12 is connected to the controllable electric drive motors 11, which are designed to adjust the joints 14 of the robot arm 2. With the robot controller 12, an inventive robot control pendant 15 is connected control technology.”);
and controlling the electric motors of the robot arm to move the links using the control device, automatically according to a robot program implemented on the control device, or in a manual driving mode by manual control, wherein planning of movements of the links of the robot arm is based at least in part on the physical data obtained from the robot add-on part. (Riedel page 3 paragraph 11 reads “In general, at least one mechanical connection between the robot hand-held device and the electronically communicating device is provided by the plug connection means according to the invention. The robot hand-held device, in turn, is generally connected in terms of control technology to a robot controller, such that the robot controller is actuated by operating the safety basic control device of the robot operator's handset in order, for example, to move the robot arm or a mobile robot platform in a controlled manner”);
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Guerin (US 20180311831 A1), in further view of Lehner (US 20210397153 A1).
Regarding claim 16 Guerin teaches A robot add-on part, comprising: a casing; a coupling arranged on the casing and designed for releasable coupling in a form-fitting manner to at least one counter-coupling provided on an outer surface of a link of a robot; (Guerin figures 1A and 1B depict a rigid robotic end effector that is designed to be attached, detached or swapped from a robotic arm.);
PNG
media_image1.png
395
285
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Guerin Figures 1A, 1B
wherein the coupling is designed, in a state coupled to the link of the robot via coupling with the corresponding counter-coupling, to position and orient the robot add- on part relative to the link of the robot with a position and orientation accuracy sufficient for the positioning accuracy of the robot; (Guerin [0021] reads “Adaptive robotic retooling apparatus and methods, embodiments of which are described herein, solve several problems that are typical of outfitting a robot in a robotic system with different robotic peripherals (e.g., tools, sensors, end effectors, etc.) to allow the robot to successfully and safely perform actions with the robotic peripherals in the physical world. One, the robotic peripherals must be attached to the robot in a repeatable and rigid manner. This is required so that an attached robotic peripheral does not move or come loose while the robot performs actions with the attached robotic peripheral. Two, the physical properties of the attached robotic peripheral, such as its mass, center of mass, moment of inertia, shape, physical extent, interaction or grasping point, must be programmed into the robotic system. The size information is required so that interaction point of the attached robotic peripheral as well as its shape and extent can be factored into calculations for kinematic movement, collision detection, and other motion calculations.”);
at least one control component arranged on the casing or in the casing, the at least one control component comprising a data memory in which physical data of the robot add-on part are stored; (Guerin [0039] reads “Peripheral adapter 420 includes a communication device 426, which is communicatively linked to a data storage unit 428 that is programmable to store a peripheral profile of the robotic peripheral designated for peripheral adapter 420. … Data storage unit 428 includes a non-volatile, computer-readable storage medium mounted on a substrate (e.g., a circuit board) or embedded in the structure of peripheral adapter 420 in a protected fashion.” And [0023] reads “Peripheral adapter 120 can be programmed to store at least one peripheral profile containing information associated with robotic peripheral 80, such as a set of physical properties of robotic peripheral 80 (e.g., unique identifier, name, model, type, relative mounting offset, size, mass, shape, physical extent, type and/or location of attachment sites 82, etc.),”);
and a control interface designed and configured to transmit the physical data of the robot add-on part present in the data memory to a control device of the robot when the robot add-on part is coupled to the link of the robot; (Guerin [0019] reads “When the programmable peripheral adapter is detachably connects the robotic peripheral to the robot, the programmable peripheral adapter can communicate with the robotic system and provide the robotic system with useful information, which the robotic system uses to reconfigure the robot, update operating characteristics of the robot, and/or communicate with and operate the robotic peripheral.”);
Guerin does not teach wherein the control interface comprises: a first data line designed using non-safe technology and configured, when the robot add-on part is coupled to the link of the robot, to transmit non-safety-relevant data using the non-safe technology to the control device in order to register the robot add-on part with the control device, and to transmit the physical data to the control device, and a second data line designed using safe technology and configured, when the robot add-on part is coupled to the link of the robot, to transmit safety-relevant data and connect the control component with at least one of its functionalities to the control device using the safe technology.
Lehner in analogous art, teaches wherein the control interface comprises: a first data line designed using non-safe technology and configured, when the robot add-on part is coupled to the link of the robot, to transmit non-safety-relevant data using the non-safe technology to the control device in order to register the robot add-on part with the control device, and to transmit the physical data to the control device, and a second data line designed using safe technology and configured, when the robot add-on part is coupled to the link of the robot, to transmit safety-relevant data and connect the control component with at least one of its functionalities to the control device using the safe technology. (Lehner [0036] reads “It is also possible to provide a combinational connection of the hand-held terminal 4 to the machine controller 3, 3′. Data or signals which are not safety-critical are then exchanged or transmitted by means of the radio-based transmission interface 6. However, data or signals which are comparatively safety-critical and relate, for example, to an emergency stop actuation element 8 at the hand-held terminal 4, are exchanged or transmitted by means of the wired transmission interface 6′.”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Guerin with that of Lehner to produce a system that would allow for the transmission of different types of data through different data lines, thereby ensuring that safety related data is effectively transmitted. Doing so would constitute the combination of known methods to yield predictable results since both detachable robotic peripherals and separated data lines for safety information would be known to one with ordinary skill in the art. Similarly, their combination would yield the desired and predictable result of a detachable robotic control that could effectively ensures that safety relevant data is transmitted without error.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Guerin/Riedel, in further view of Gombert (US 20170266807 A1).
Regarding claim 21 Guerin/Riedel teaches The robot add-on part of claim 11, wherein: the coupling is configured for releasable coupling in a form-fitting manner to a counter-coupling located on a link of the robot other than an end link. (Gombert figure 1 clearly shows that the robotic control device 13 can be positioned away from the end effector of the robotic arm 10.);
PNG
media_image2.png
237
170
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Gombert Figure 1
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Guerin/Riedel with that of Gombert to include a system that would allow the control element to be placed in a variety of locations. This would allow for the system to be more adaptable to a wider range of different operating situations. (Gombert [0007] reads “The user of the robotic arm thus has the possibility of selecting the point of attachment of the input module depending on requirements and if necessary adapting it to the environment in which the robotic arm is used. Input modules which are not required in order to avoid an obstacle need not be fitted, nor do they need to be purchased, so that the user is able to minimize the costs of acquisition of the robotic arm. If it transpires that, in a particular working environment, the number of input modules is not sufficient in order to guide the arm around all obstacles, a further input module can be purchased and fitted. Since the same design of input module can be used at different points on a robotic arm, it can be manufactured in large quantities and offered for sale correspondingly cheaply by the manufacturer.”);
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues < Claims 11-15 and 17-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as allegedly unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0311831 to Guerin in view of European Patent Application No. 3 081 347 to Riedel et al. Claim 11 is the only independent claim of this rejected group. During the telephone interview, Applicant's representative noted that Guerin '831 admittedly fails to teach or suggest an add-on part (peripheral) including "at least one input feature communicating with the control device of the robot via the control interface, the at least one input feature configured for actuation by a user to control operation of the robot when the robot add-on part is coupled to the link of the robot," as set forth in claim 11. Rather, Guerin '831 is directed to programmable adapters for connecting robotic peripherals to robotic flange at an end link of a robotic arm (i.e. the end effector). Guerin '831 discloses that these robotic peripherals are controlled by the robot to which they are attached. (See, for example, Guerin '831 at paragraphs 18, 28, 29, and 46.) Accordingly, Guerin's architecture is built around a master-slave relationship wherein the robot is the master.> [Remarks page 9 Spanning Paragraph]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The current rejection of record relies upon Guerin to teach all limitations regarding the physical connection and implementation between the robot and the additional add on device while Riedel is relied upon to teach limitations that are directed towards the control of the robotic system by the add on device. In that manner it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, to have modified the teachings Guerin with that of Riedel in the way presented. Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Applicant argues < In contrast to amended claim 11, the handheld device of Riedel '347 is disclosed as being configured to communicate with the robot controller wirelessly or via a wired connection. Accordingly, the handheld device of Riedel '347 does not need to be coupled to a link of the robot in order to control it remotely, and the alleged combination of Guerin '831 and Riedel '347 does not result in the claimed invention. For at least these additional reasons, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of claim 11 be withdrawn. > [Remarks Page 11 Second Paragraph]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The teachings of Riedel describe embodiments in which the control device may be configured to connect to the robot by either a wired connection or a wireless connection or both. Therefore, in a situation in which the system has a wired connection It would be appreciated by one with ordinary skill in the art that it would also have to have a wireless connection and in that situation it would then only have a wired connection. Similarly, the examiner would like to remind the applicant to ensure that they have enough written description of a limitation in the specification of the claimed invention as to avoid any possible new matter rejections in future office actions. Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Applicant argues < Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection of claim 16 because Guerin '831 and Riedel '347 admittedly fail to teach or suggest the combination of features set forth in claim 16 including "a first data line designed using non-safe technology, and a second data line designed using safe technology and configured to connect the control component with at least one of its functionalities to the control device using the safe technology," as set forth in claim 16. Cookson '085 was cited for alleged disclosure of safe- and non-safe technology (Office Action at p. 18), however, Cookson '085 does not appear to disclose the use of different technology or methods when data is transmitted compared to when functionalities of a robot device are connected, as was discussed in the Amendment filed March 18, 2026. In any case, claim 16 has been amended herein as discussed during the telephone interview, and now recites that the first data line designed using non-safe technology is configured to transmit non-safety relevant data, and the second data line designed using safe technology is configured to transmit safety-relevant data. In this regard, there is no disclosure in Cookson '085, nor Guerin '831 or Riedel '347, of first and second data lines as now set forth in amended claim 16. In view of the remarks above and the discussion during the telephone interview, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of claim 16 be withdrawn. > [Remarks Page 12 First and Second Paragraphs]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The applicant, in amendment has changed the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed invention from that of a first and second data line for configuring communication between the two given devices to that of a first and second data line in which different aspects of data are transferred. This new interpretation of the claimed invention in now rejected in light of Lehner. Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Throughout examination other references were found that could read onto the prior art. Though these references were not used in this examination they could be used in future examination and could read on the contents of the current disclosure. These references are, Kato (US 20040128029 A1). Kato in analogous art, could have been used to teach limitation relating to the addition of a special robotic peripheral that could be attached to the end of a robotic manipulator. Similarly, Kato could have been used to teach the usage of multiple communication lines for transmitting different types of data. However, Kato does not teach that these data would be safety and non-safety related data. In light of this limitations Kato was not used for the current rejection of record.
Conclusion
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN MARTIN O'MALLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-6228. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 am - 5 pm.
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, Ramon Mercado can be reached at (571) 270 - 5744. 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.
/JOHN MARTIN O'MALLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
/ELLIS B. RAMIREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights