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 .
Acknowledgement
Examiner acknowledges receipt of applicant’s Preliminary Amendment to the Claims and Specification (filed 10/10/2024).
Claim Objections
Claims 17 and 18 are objected to because of the following informality: in claim 17 line 5, “comprise” should be changed to --comprises--. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-18 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the average" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggests changing said limitation to --an average--.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the pivot point of each of the two partially-circular elements" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the second drive units" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Does Applicant mean --the second drive unit--?
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the average" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggests changing said limitation to --an average--.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the restoration-force" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Does Applicant mean --the restoration-force arrangement--?
In claim 14, the recitation of “a third drive unit” prior to the recitation of “a second drive unit” is improper.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the average" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggests changing said limitation to --an average--.
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, 4-9, 11-13, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 113619703 A, cited by Applicant.
Regarding claims 1, 4-9, and 11-13, CN 113619703 A (at least Figs. 1-21) discloses
(claim 1) a climbing robot for climbing ferrous structures, comprising:
a first drive unit 1, a second drive unit 2 coupled to a pivot mechanism 4, and a third drive unit 3, wherein the second drive unit 2 is coupled to the first 1 and third drive 3 units, wherein each of the first 1, second 2, and third 3 drive units comprise a wheel arrangement comprising at least one wheel 5, 5, 64, 64 configured to adhere to a ferrous tower, and each wheel 5, 5, 64, 64 is independently controllable; and,
wherein a first wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of one of the first, second, and third drive units, and a second wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of another one of the first, second, and third drive units,
wherein the pivot mechanism 4 is arranged to change the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements in response to movement, about a point of the pivot mechanism 4 by an angle, of the first and third drive units with respect to each other (at least Figs.19a-19g);
(claim 4) wherein the first wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of one of the first 1 and third 3 drive units, and the second wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of the second drive units, wherein the change in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements is an increase in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements (at least Figs. 19a-19d);
(claim 5) wherein the first wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of the first drive unit 1, and a third wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of the third drive unit 3,
wherein the pivot mechanism 4 is arranged to decrease the average distance between the first and third wheel arrangements in response to movement about the point of the pivot mechanism 4 by an angle, of the first and third drive units with respect to each other (at least Figs. 19a-19d);
(claim 6) wherein the first wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of the first drive unit 1, and the second wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of the third drive unit 3, wherein the change in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements is a decrease in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements (at least Figs 19a-19d);
(claim 7) wherein the first drive unit 1 and the second drive unit 2 are coupled in order to allow the first drive unit 1 and the second drive unit 2 to yaw and roll with respect to each other (at least Figs 19a-19d); and,
wherein the second drive unit 2 and the third drive unit 3 are coupled so to allow the second and third drive units to yaw and roll with respect to each other (at least Figs 19a-19d);
(claim 8) wherein each wheel arrangement of the first 1, second 2, and third 3 drive units comprise two wheels 5, 5, 64, 64;
(claim 9) further comprising a restoration-force arrangement (magnets) configured to bias at least one of the wheel arrangements to a surface of a ferrous tower, optionally wherein the restoration-force is an elastic material;
(claim 11) wherein the centre of mass of the climbing robot is off-centre and optionally the third drive unit comprises the power source for the climbing robot;
(claim 12) wherein each wheel 5, 5, 64, 64 comprises permanent magnets 7, 43, 48, 81 to adhere to a ferrous structure;
(claim 13) wherein the climbing robot further comprises a controller (Figs. 20-21) configured to control the wheels of the first wheel arrangement and the wheels of the second wheel arrangement to change the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements,
wherein the pivot mechanism 4 is arranged to cause the first 1 and third 3 drive units to move with respect to each other about a point of the pivot mechanism 4 by an angle, in response to the change in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, CN 113619703 A (at least Figs. 1-21) discloses
(claim 17) a method of controlling a climbing robot for climbing ferrous structures, the climbing robot comprising:
a first drive unit 1, a second drive unit 2 coupled to a pivot mechanism 4, and a third drive unit 3, wherein the second drive unit 2 is coupled to the first 1 and third 3 drive units, wherein each of the first, second, and third drive units comprise a wheel arrangement comprising at least one wheel 5, 5, 64, 64 configured to adhere to a ferrous tower, and each wheel is independently controllable,
the method comprising: operating a first wheel arrangement and a second wheel arrangement to change the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements, to cause the first 1 and third 3 drive units to move with respect to each other about a point of the pivot mechanism 4 by an angle, wherein the first wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of one of the first, second, and third drive units, and the second wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of another one of the first, second, and third drive units (at least Figs. 19a-19d);
(claim 18) wherein each wheel arrangement of the first 1, second 2, and third 3 drive units comprise two wheels 5, 5, 64, 64, the method further comprising: operating both wheels of one of the first, second, and third drive units independently to turn the climbing robot.
Claims 1, 4-6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by RU 2 605 234 C1, cited by Applicant.
Regarding claims 1, 4-6, 8, 9, 11, and 12, RU 2 605 234 C1 (at least Fig.; see annotated Fig. attached herewith) discloses
(claim 1) a climbing robot for climbing ferrous structures (pipeline), comprising:
a first drive unit 1, a second drive unit 1 coupled to a pivot mechanism 10, and a third drive unit 1, wherein the second drive unit 1 is coupled to the first 1 and third 1 drive units, wherein each of the first 1, second 1, and third 1 drive units comprise a wheel arrangement 5-7 comprising at least one wheel 5, 6 configured to adhere to a ferrous tower (pipeline), and each wheel 5, 6 is independently controllable; and,
wherein a first wheel arrangement 5-7 is the wheel arrangement of one of the first 1, second 1, and third 1 drive units, and a second wheel arrangement 5-7 is the wheel arrangement of another one of the first 1, second 1, and third 1 drive units,
wherein the pivot mechanism 10 is arranged to change the average distance between the first 5-7 and second 5-7 wheel arrangements in response to movement, about a point of the pivot mechanism 10 by an angle, of the first 1 and third 1 drive units with respect to each other (at least Fig.);
(claim 4) wherein the first wheel arrangement 5-7 is the wheel arrangement of one of the first 1 and third 1 drive units, and the second wheel arrangement 5-7 is the wheel arrangement of the second drive units 1, wherein the change in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements is an increase in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements (at least Fig.);
(claim 5) wherein the first wheel arrangement 5-7 is the wheel arrangement of the first drive unit 1, and a third wheel arrangement 5-7 is the wheel arrangement of the third drive unit 3,
wherein the pivot mechanism 10 is arranged to decrease the average distance between the first and third wheel arrangements in response to movement about the point of the pivot mechanism 10 by an angle, of the first and third drive units with respect to each other (at least Fig.);
(claim 6) wherein the first wheel arrangement 5-7 is the wheel arrangement of the first drive unit 1, and the second wheel arrangement 5-7 is the wheel arrangement of the third drive unit 1, wherein the change in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements is a decrease in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements (at least Fig.);
(claim 8) wherein each wheel arrangement 5-7 of the first 1, second 1, and third 1 drive units comprise two wheels 5, 6;
(claim 9) further comprising a restoration-force arrangement (magnets) configured to bias at least one of the wheel arrangements to a surface of a ferrous tower, optionally wherein the restoration-force is an elastic material;
(claim 11) wherein the centre of mass of the climbing robot is off-centre (due to camera 12 on first drive unit 1) and optionally the third drive unit comprises the power source for the climbing robot;
(claim 12) wherein each wheel 5, 6 comprises permanent magnets 6 to adhere to a ferrous structure (pipeline).
PNG
media_image1.png
850
660
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 17 and 18, RU 2 605 234 C1 (at least Fig.; see annotated Fig. attached herewith) discloses
(claim 17) a method of controlling a climbing robot for climbing ferrous structures (pipeline), the climbing robot comprising:
a first drive unit 1, a second drive unit 1 coupled to a pivot mechanism 10, and a third drive unit 1, wherein the second drive unit 1 is coupled to the first 1 and third 1 drive units, wherein each of the first 1, second 1, and third 1 drive units comprise a wheel arrangement 5-7 comprising at least one wheel 5, 6 configured to adhere to a ferrous tower (pipeline), and each wheel 5, 6 is independently controllable,
the method comprising: operating a first wheel arrangement 5-7 and a second wheel arrangement 5-7 to change the average distance between the first 5-7 and second 5-7 wheel arrangements, to cause the first 1 and third 1 drive units to move with respect to each other about a point of the pivot mechanism 10 by an angle, wherein the first wheel arrangement 5-7 is the wheel arrangement of one of the first 1, second 1, and third 1 drive units, and the second wheel arrangement 5-7 is the wheel arrangement of another one of the first 1, second 1, and third 1 drive units;
(claim 18) wherein each wheel arrangement of the first 1, second 1, and third 1 drive units comprise two wheels 5, 6, 5, 6, the method further comprising: operating both wheels of one of the first, second, and third drive units independently to turn the climbing robot.
Claims 1, 4-6, 9, 12, 13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lin et al. (WO 2018/121080 A1), cited by Applicant.
Regarding claims 1, 4-6, 9, 12, and 13, Lin et al. (at least Figs. 1-5B; see annotated Fig. 2 attached herewith) discloses
(claim 1) a climbing robot for climbing ferrous structures, comprising:
a first drive unit, a second drive unit coupled to a pivot mechanism 120, and a third drive unit, wherein the second drive unit is coupled to the first and third drive units, wherein each of the first, second, and third drive units comprise a wheel arrangement comprising at least one wheel configured to adhere to a ferrous tower, and each wheel is independently controllable; and,
wherein a first wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of one of the first, second, and third drive units, and a second wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of another one of the first, second, and third drive units,
wherein the pivot mechanism 120 is arranged to change the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements in response to movement, about a point of the pivot mechanism 120 by an angle, of the first and third drive units with respect to each other (at least Figs. 2, 3);
(claim 4) wherein the first wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of one of the first and third drive units, and the second wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of the second drive units, wherein the change in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements is an increase in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements (at least Fig. 3);
(claim 5) wherein the first wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of the first drive unit, and a third wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of the third drive unit,
wherein the pivot mechanism 120 is arranged to decrease the average distance between the first and third wheel arrangements in response to movement about the point of the pivot mechanism 120 by an angle, of the first and third drive units with respect to each other;
(claim 6) wherein the first wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of the first drive unit, and the second wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of the third drive unit, wherein the change in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements is a decrease in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements;
(claim 9) further comprising a restoration-force arrangement (magnets) configured to bias at least one of the wheel arrangements to a surface of a ferrous tower, optionally wherein the restoration-force is an elastic material;
(claim 12) wherein each wheel comprises permanent magnets (at least Abstract) to adhere to a ferrous structure;
(claim 13) wherein the climbing robot further comprises a controller (at least Abstract) configured to control the wheels of the first wheel arrangement and the wheels of the second wheel arrangement to change the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements,
PNG
media_image2.png
395
601
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the pivot mechanism 120 is arranged to cause the first and third drive units to move with respect to each other about a point of the pivot mechanism 120 by an angle, in response to the change in the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements.
Regarding claim 17, Lin et al. (at least Figs. 1-5B; see annotated Fig. 2 attached herewith) discloses a method of controlling a climbing robot for climbing ferrous structures, the climbing robot comprising:
a first drive unit, a second drive unit coupled to a pivot mechanism 120, and a third drive unit, wherein the second drive unit is coupled to the first and third drive units, wherein each of the first, second, and third drive units comprise a wheel arrangement comprising at least one wheel configured to adhere to a ferrous tower, and each wheel is independently controllable,
the method comprising: operating a first wheel arrangement and a second wheel arrangement to change the average distance between the first and second wheel arrangements, to cause the first and third drive units to move with respect to each other about a point of the pivot mechanism 120 by an angle, wherein the first wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of one of the first, second, and third drive units, and the second wheel arrangement is the wheel arrangement of another one of the first, second, and third drive units.
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.
Claims 2, 3, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RU 2 605 234 C1 in view of Kirby et al. (US 5,456,568), both cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 2 and 3, RU 2 605 234 C1 (at least Fig.; see annotated Fig. attached herewith) discloses the claimed invention except for
(claim 2) wherein the pivot mechanism 10 is a dual gear pivot mechanism comprising two partially-circular elements arranged to couple at a pitch point, and the point of the pivot mechanism 10 is the pitch point of the dual gear pivot mechanism; and
(claim 3) wherein the pivot point of each of the two partially-circular elements is fixed relative to the second drive unit.
Kirby et al. (at least Figs. 1-6) discloses that it is known in the art to provide
(claim 2) a pivot mechanism that is a dual gear pivot mechanism comprising two partially-circular elements arranged to couple at a pitch point, and the point of the pivot mechanism is the pitch point of the dual gear pivot mechanism; and
(claim 3) wherein the pivot point of each of the two partially-circular elements is fixed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the pivot mechanism of RU 2 605 234 C1 with the dual gear pivot mechanism comprising two partially-circular elements according to the teachings of Kirby et al., in order to achieve the desirable result of improving maneuverability.
Regarding claim 14 and 15, RU 2 605 234 C1 (at least Fig.) discloses a climbing robot comprising a pivot mechanism 10, a first drive unit 1, a second drive unit 1, and a third drive unit 1, but does not explicitly disclose
(claim 14) a dual gear pivot mechanism comprising:
a first arm comprising: a first partially-circular element at a distal end of the first arm, and a first coupling end configured to couple to the first drive unit of the climbing robot; and,
a second arm comprising: a second partially-circular element at a distal end, and a second coupling end configured to couple to the third drive unit of the climbing robot,
wherein the first partially-circular element and the second partially-circular element are arranged to connect with each other to form a pitch point and each comprise a respective pivot point, wherein each pivot point is coupled to the second drive unit of the climbing robot such that the pivot points are fixed relative to each other, wherein the first and second arms are arranged to pivot about the respective pivot points;
(claim 15) wherein the first and second arms are arranged to move about the pitch point symmetrically.
Kirby et al. (at least Figs. 1-6) discloses that it is known in the art to provide
(claim 14) a dual gear pivot mechanism comprising:
a first arm 92 comprising: a first partially-circular element 98 at a distal end of the first arm, and a first coupling end (opposite end); and,
a second arm 106 comprising: a second partially-circular element 104 at a distal end, and a second coupling end (opposite end),
wherein the first partially-circular element 98 and the second partially-circular element 104 are arranged to connect with each other to form a pitch point and each comprise a respective pivot point 70, 72, wherein each pivot point is coupled such that the pivot points are fixed relative to each other, wherein the first 98 and second 106 arms are arranged to pivot about the respective pivot points;
(claim 15) wherein the first 98 and second 106 arms are arranged to move about the pitch point symmetrically.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the pivot mechanism of RU 2 605 234 C1 with the dual gear pivot mechanism comprising two partially-circular elements according to the teachings of Kirby et al., in order to achieve the desirable result of improving maneuverability.
Claims 2, 3, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (WO 2018/121080 A1) in view of Kirby et al. (US 5,456,568), both cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 2 and 3, Lin et al. (at least Figs. 1-5B; see annotated Fig. 2 attached herewith) discloses the claimed invention except for
(claim 2) wherein the pivot mechanism 120 is a dual gear pivot mechanism comprising two partially-circular elements arranged to couple at a pitch point, and the point of the pivot mechanism 120 is the pitch point of the dual gear pivot mechanism; and
(claim 3) wherein the pivot point of each of the two partially-circular elements is fixed relative to the second drive unit.
Kirby et al. (at least Figs. 1-6) discloses that it is known in the art to provide
(claim 2) a pivot mechanism that is a dual gear pivot mechanism comprising two partially-circular elements arranged to couple at a pitch point, and the point of the pivot mechanism is the pitch point of the dual gear pivot mechanism; and
(claim 3) wherein the pivot point of each of the two partially-circular elements is fixed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the pivot mechanism of Lin et al. with the dual gear pivot mechanism comprising two partially-circular elements according to the teachings of Kirby et al., in order to achieve the desirable result of improving maneuverability.
Regarding claim 14 and 15, Lin et al. (at least Figs. 1-5B; see annotated Fig. 2 attached herewith) discloses a climbing robot comprising a pivot mechanism 120, a first drive unit, a second drive unit, and a third drive unit, but does not explicitly disclose
(claim 14) a dual gear pivot mechanism comprising:
a first arm comprising: a first partially-circular element at a distal end of the first arm, and a first coupling end configured to couple to the first drive unit of the climbing robot; and,
a second arm comprising: a second partially-circular element at a distal end, and a second coupling end configured to couple to the third drive unit of the climbing robot,
wherein the first partially-circular element and the second partially-circular element are arranged to connect with each other to form a pitch point and each comprise a respective pivot point, wherein each pivot point is coupled to the second drive unit of the climbing robot such that the pivot points are fixed relative to each other, wherein the first and second arms are arranged to pivot about the respective pivot points;
(claim 15) wherein the first and second arms are arranged to move about the pitch point symmetrically.
Kirby et al. (at least Figs. 1-6) discloses that it is known in the art to provide
(claim 14) a dual gear pivot mechanism comprising:
a first arm 92 comprising: a first partially-circular element 98 at a distal end of the first arm, and a first coupling end (opposite end); and,
a second arm 106 comprising: a second partially-circular element 104 at a distal end, and a second coupling end (opposite end),
wherein the first partially-circular element 98 and the second partially-circular element 104 are arranged to connect with each other to form a pitch point and each comprise a respective pivot point 70, 72, wherein each pivot point is coupled such that the pivot points are fixed relative to each other, wherein the first 98 and second 106 arms are arranged to pivot about the respective pivot points;
(claim 15) wherein the first 98 and second 106 arms are arranged to move about the pitch point symmetrically.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the pivot mechanism of Lin et al. with the dual gear pivot mechanism comprising two partially-circular elements according to the teachings of Kirby et al., in order to achieve the desirable result of improving maneuverability.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RU 2 605 234 C1 in view of CN 113619703 A, both cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 7, RU 2 605 234 C1 (at least Fig.; see annotated Fig. attached herewith) discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the first drive unit and the second drive unit are coupled in order to allow the first drive unit and the second drive unit to yaw and roll with respect to each other; and,
wherein the second drive unit and the third drive unit are coupled so to allow the second and third drive units to yaw and roll with respect to each other.
But CN 113619703 A (at least Figs. 1-21) discloses that it is known in the art to provide a robot, wherein a first drive unit 1 and a second drive unit 2 are coupled (via universal joint 4) in order to allow the first drive unit 1 and the second drive unit 2 to yaw and roll with respect to each other; and,
wherein the second drive unit 2 and a third drive unit 3 are coupled (via universal joint 4) so to allow the second 2 and third 3 drive units to yaw and roll with respect to each other.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the first, second, and third drive units of RU 2 605 234 C1 with the universal joints according to the teachings of CN 113619703 A, in order to achieve the desirable result of improving maneuverability.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 16 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The primary reason for the allowance of claim 10 in this case, is the inclusion of the limitation “wherein the restoration-force arrangement is an elastic material which passes across the point of the pivot mechanism” now included in claim 10, in combination with the other elements recited, which is not found in the prior art of record.
The primary reason for the allowance of claim 16 in this case, is the inclusion of the limitation “wherein the first arm further comprises a first connection point arranged to connect to an elastic material, wherein the second arm further comprises a second connection point arranged to connect to the elastic material, wherein the elastic material is coupled between the first and second connection points and arranged to bias the pitch point” now included in claim 16, in combination with the other elements recited, which is not found in the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSELYNN Y SLITERIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6675. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm EST.
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, Jason D. Shanske can be reached at 571-270-5985. 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.
/JOSELYNN Y SLITERIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3614
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614