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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11, and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lauer et al. (US 2022/0081048 A1) in view of Zimmerman et al. (DE 102016107564 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lauer discloses assembly system comprising a workstation enclosure (224, 236, 222; pg. 26, [0715]; Fig. 14) in which assembly and/or machining activities (i.e., processing station 236) can take place on a work object (102); and a transport vehicle (100) on which the work object (102) can be releasably mounted (pg. 27, [00721], wherein the workstation enclosure (222, 236; Fig. 15) is provided with an entrance and an exit, a guide path (266; Fig. 18) being provided between the entrance and the exit, along which guide path (266) the transport vehicle (100) can be guided from the entrance to the exit.
Regarding claim 2, Lauer discloses wherein the entrance and/or the exit is dimensioned wider (see Fig. 18) in its transverse direction compared to a transverse direction of the guide path (266).
Regarding claim 3, Lauer discloses wherein the guide path (266; Fig. 18) has mutually opposite longitudinal walls (not labeled, Fig. 18) and/or route markings, which specify a route of the transport vehicle (100) from the entrance to the exit.
Regarding claim 4, Lauer discloses wherein the transport vehicle (100) has a surroundings scanner (190; pg. 5, [0142]; pg. 25, [0670]), which scans the surroundings of the transport vehicle (100), and the transport vehicle (100) adapts and/or find its route on the basis of information from the surroundings scanner (190).
Regarding claim 5, Lauer discloses wherein the transport vehicle (100) is configured in such a way that it independently enters the entrance on the basis of the information from the surroundings scanner (190).
Regarding claim 6, Lauer discloses wherein the transport vehicle (100) is configured (pg. 25, [0672]) in such a way that it determines its route from the entrance to the exit on the basis of the information from the surroundings scanner (1900), or in that the route from the entrance to the exit is fixed and is determined from a position of the transport vehicle (100) in relation to a course of the guide path (266).
Regarding claim 7, Lauer discloses wherein the assembly system is configured in such a way that the workstation enclosure communicates with the transport vehicle (100) via a communications interface (i.e., control device 204; pg. 25, [0684]).
Regarding claim 8, Lauer discloses wherein the workstation enclosure (224, 236, 222) has a work-object lifting panel (246) to which the work object can be transferred from the transport vehicle (100).
Regarding claim 9, Lauer discloses wherein the workstation enclosure (224, 236, 222) has a floor in which a slot (not labeled, Fig. 15) is provided between the entrance and the exit, into which slot a mounting (170; Fig. 19), which is provided on the transport vehicle (100) and by which the work object (102) is releasably attached to the transport vehicle (100), can extend from an underside, and/or the assembly system is configured in such a way that, during the passage of the transport vehicle (100) from the entrance to the exit under the workstation enclosure (224, 236, 222), the work object (102) is transferred to the work-object lifting panel (246), while the transport vehicle (100) is placed under the work-object lifting panel, that assembly and/or machining activities are carried out on the work object during the placement of the work object on the work-object lifting panel, and that the work object (102) is then transferred from the work-object lifting panel (246) back to the transport vehicle (100), and the transport vehicle (100) leaves the workstation enclosure through the exit.
Regarding claim 11, Lauer discloses wherein the work-object lifting panel (246) has a further slot, which is aligned with the slot in a floor of the workstation enclosure.
Regarding claim 13, Lauer discloses wherein the workstation enclosure (224, 236, 222) is formed by a planar platform (not labeled, Fig, 14), which is delimited.
Regarding claim 14, Lauer discloses wherein the workstation enclosure (224, 236, 222) has, at the entrance, an input conveyor track element (208) provided on an input lifting panel, and/or has, at the exit, an output conveyor track element (208) provided on an output lifting panel, and the assembly system is configured such that the work object (102) is transferred from the transport vehicle (100) to the input conveyor track element (208) in the entrance, and/or such that the work object is transferred from the output conveyor track element to the transport vehicle in the exit.
Regarding claim 15, Lauer discloses wherein the input and/or output conveyor track element (208) has a slot (not labeled, Fig. 15) into which there can extend, from an underside, a mounting which is provided on the transport vehicle (100) and by which the work object (102) is releasably attached to the transport vehicle (100).
Regarding claim 16, Lauer discloses wherein the workstation enclosure (224, 236, 222) has, above the guide path (266), an assembly and/or machining conveyor track element, which is fixedly mounted at such a vertical height that the work object can be fed from an input conveyor track element (208) to the assembly and/or machining conveyor track element only when an input lifting table panel (246) has performed a predetermined stroke in the height direction, and/or wherein the work object (102) can be fed from the assembly and/or machining conveyor track element to an output conveyor track element only when the output lifting panel (246) has performed a predetermined stroke in the height direction.
Regarding claim 17, Lauer discloses wherein the assembly and/or machining conveyor track element (208) does not have a slot provided in its longitudinal direction.
Regarding claim 18, Lauer discloses wherein the workstation enclosure (224, 236, 222) has one or more robots (238; Fig. 15) along the assembly and/or machining conveyor track element (208), which robots (238) are configured to perform a respective assembly and/or machining step on the work object (102).
Regarding claim 19, Lauer discloses wherein the workstation enclosure (224, 236, 222) has a continuous conveyor track element (208) which is fixed in height and which extends from the entrance to the exit, wherein the work object is transferred, in the entrance, from the transport vehicle (100) to an input conveyor track section (208) of a continuous fixed-height conveyor track element and is transferred, in the exit, to the transport vehicle (100) from an output conveyor track section of the continuous fixed-height conveyor track element (208).
Lauer, however, does not disclose wherein the entrance and/or exit is dimensioned wider in the transverse direction compared to a transverse direction of the guide path; wherein the entrance and/or exit is dimensioned more than 30% wider in the transverse direction compared to the transverse direction of the guide path; or by a planar platform being delimited by a fence or wall element.
Zimmerman discloses wherein the entrance (see annotated Fig. 1) and/or exit (see annotated Fig. 1) is dimensioned wider in the transverse direction compared to a transverse direction of the guide path (17; Fig. 1), and wherein the entrance and/or exit is dimensioned more than 30% wider in the transverse direction compared to the transverse direction of the guide path (17). Zimmerman discloses a workstation (2) being delimited by a fence or wall element (14), and the entrance/exit being delimited by locks (16).
[AltContent: textbox (Entrance)][AltContent: textbox (Exit)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
555
765
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the dimensions of the entrance and/or exit of Lauer wider in the transverse direction compared to a transverse direction of the guide path, to make the dimensions of the entrance and/or exit of Lauer more than 30% wider in the transverse direction compared to the transverse direction of the guide path, and to delimit the planar platform of Lauer by a fence or wall element, in light of the teachings of Zimmerman, in order to provide safety design and perimeter for a production station as workpieces/components are conveyed into and out of the production station.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lauer/Zimmerman as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Leschke et al. (EP 100670 A2).
Lauer/Zimmerman discloses all the claimed subject matter except for wherein the workstation enclosure has a worker lifting panel on which a worker can stand when carrying out assembly and/or machining activities on the work object.
Leschke discloses a workstation enclosure having a worker lifting panel (14; Fig. 2b) on which a worker (not labeled; Fig. 2b) can stand when carrying out assembly and/or machining activities on a work object (2; Fig. 2b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the workstation enclosure of Lauer in the combination of Lauer/Zimmerman with a worker lifting panel on which a worker can stand when carrying out assembly and/or machining activities on the work object, in light of the teachings of Leschke, in order to provide accessibility to the vehicle body.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 20-22 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10 of the response, filed 3/30/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-9, 11, and 13-19 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection 1-9, 11, and 13-19 was made using Lauer in view of Zimmerman et al. (DE 102016107564 A1) under 35 USC 103, and a subsequently a new rejection of claim 12 was using Lauer/Zimmerman further in view of Leschke.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JERMIE E COZART whose telephone number is (571)272-4528. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 7:00pm.
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, Sunil Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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.
/JERMIE E COZART/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
June 3, 2026
Prosecution Insights