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 . Pursuant to communications filed on 13 September 2024, this is a First Action Non-Final Rejection on the Merits. Claims 1-5 are currently pending in the instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 13 September 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the Examiner.
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 1-5 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.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant provides the claim limitation, “a second sensor configured to measure a magnitude of a force opposing an angle at which the cutting part of the deboning robot is inserted into a section of the target meat from each joint of the deboning robot”, however, based on the currently provided claim language, it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the limitation encompass and therefore claim 1 is rendered indefinite. Specifically, it is unclear if the second sensor is configured to measure a magnitude of force opposing an angle” of the cutting part of the deboning robot, or alternatively is the second sensor measuring a magnitude of force opposing an angle of one or more joints of the deboning robot, or some alternative and/or variation thereof, and therefore claim 1 is rejected under this section. Accordingly, appropriate correction and/or clarification are earnestly solicited.
Regarding claims 2-5, these claims are either directly or indirectly dependent upon independent claim 1 and therefore are also rejected under this section for at least their dependence upon a rejected base claim. Accordingly, appropriate correction and/or clarification are earnestly solicited.
Examiner has addressed the claims in view of the prior art below, as best understood by the Examiner, in light of the 35 USC 112(b), or second paragraph rejection(s) provided herein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hattori et al (US 2012/0295527 A1, hereinafter Hattori).
Regarding claim 1, Hattori teaches a position control device for a deboning robot (Figure 3, meat cutting robots 52a to 52c; at least as in paragraph 0081, wherein “meat cutting robots have multi-axis articulated arms of four or six axes 54a to 54c and electric motors 56a to 56c that operate the multi-axis articulated arms. To the tips of the multi-axis articulated arms, knife-shaped cutting blades 58a to 58c are attached”), comprising:
a first sensor (Figure 3, X-Ray irradiation device 34) configured to acquire image data including an area where a cutting part of the deboning robot is in contact with a section of a target meat (Figures 3 & 6A-6B; at least as in paragraphs 0024, 0080, 0094-0095, specifically at least as in paragraph 0024, wherein “an X-ray irradiation unit that is disposed on an upstream side of the multi-axis articulated arm in a direction of transport of the arm part or the thigh part and irradiates the X-ray to the suspended arm part or the suspended thigh part” and further as in at least paragraph 0095, wherein “the X-ray transmission image is captured into the image analysis processing unit”);
a controller (Figures 3 & 6A-6B, controller(s) 60, 80) configured to set a candidate path corresponding to a designated area of the target meat using the acquired image data (Figures 3 & 6A-6B; at least as in paragraphs 0024, 0081-0083 and 0089-0091, specifically as in paragraph 0024, wherein “a controller that controls an operation of the cutting blade, the controller including a comparison reference point setting unit that sets a comparison reference point on the outline of the bone of the arm part or the thigh part, a storage unit that stores three-dimensional position coordinates of a target operation course of the cutting blade and two-dimensional position coordinates of the comparison reference point corresponding to the three-dimensional position coordinates of the target operation course” and further as in at least paragraph 0083, wherein “Step 1 shows a target operation course. The target operation course is based on the assumption that the work w has the average size and the average shape. Comparison reference points Ao to Ho are preset at eight positions on the outlines of the bones, and teaching points c00 to c99 are set on the target operation course”) Examiner notes wherein the “target operation course” taught by Hattori correlates to the claimed “candidate path” provided in the claim limitation(s).; and
a second sensor (Figure 3, torque sensors 59a to 59c) configured to measure a magnitude of a force opposing an angle at which the cutting part of the deboning robot is inserted into a section of the target meat from each joint of the deboning robot (Figures 3 & 13; at least as in paragraphs 0082, 0091 and 0097, and specifically as in at least paragraph 0082, wherein “torque sensor detects a torque value applied to the cutting blade by detecting the current value flowing in each of the electric motors 56a to 56c. During the operation of the automatic deboning apparatus 10, the torque values applied to the electric motors 56a to 56c are constantly detected by the torque sensors 59a to 59c, and detection signals of the individual torque sensors are inputted to the robot controller 60. The transport position of each work w is detected by an encoder 57 and is inputted to the controller 80 and the robot controller 60”),
wherein the controller compares the magnitude of the force opposing the angle at which the cutting part is inserted into a section of the target meat with a predetermined threshold and modifies the candidate path accordingly (Figures 3 & 6A-6B; at least as in paragraphs 0089-0092 and 0096-0100, specifically as in at least paragraphs 0098-0099, specifically wherein “the torque value T is checked (S62)” and based on said torque value compared to a threshold, one or more teaching points are changed in a direction either approaching bone or moving away from bone, as further outlined in Figure 6B, steps S62-S68).
Regarding claim 2, Hattori further teaches the position control device further comprising:
a position calculator configured to calculate a plurality of position vectors based on a displacement between the position of the cutting part of the deboning robot and the position of each of the joints (Figures 3, 4 & 6A-6B; at least as in paragraphs 0082-0086 and 0096-0100),
wherein the second sensor is configured to calculate the magnitude of the force opposing the angle at which the cutting part is inserted into a section of the target meat by performing an operation corresponding to a predetermined equation of motion based on torques measured at each of the joints and the position vectors (Figures 3, 4 & 6A-6B; at least as in paragraphs 0082-0086 and 0096-0100).
Regarding claim 3, Hattori further teaches wherein: the controller is configured to determine the contacted area as bone when the magnitude of the force opposing the angle at which the cutting part is inserted into a section of the target meat exceeds the predetermined threshold, and to newly establish a bypass path corresponding to the designated area of the target meat (Figures 3, 4 & 6A-6B; at least as in paragraphs 0092 and 0096-0100).
Regarding claim 4, Hattori further teaches wherein: the controller is configured to determine a preset bypass radius corresponding to the designated area of the target meat, and to modify the candidate path so that the cutting part performs an avoidance movement based on the bypass radius centered around the position determined to be bone within the candidate path (Figures 3-4 & 14-16; at least as in paragraphs 0082-0086, 0089-0090, 0101-0102 and 0110).
Regarding claim 5, Hattori further teaches wherein: the controller is configured to modify the candidate path so that the cutting part performs an avoidance movement according to the bypass radius set corresponding to average size of the bone present in the designated area of the target meat (Figures 3-4 & 14-16; at least as in paragraphs 0082-0086, 0089-0090, 0101-0102 and 0110).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 – Notice of References Cited form. Examiner additionally notes the following prior art references, in the same field of endeavor, and also appear to read on some of the currently provided claim limitations above;
US 11,944,105 B1, issued to Foreman et al, which is directed towards a method and apparatus for conveying a meat product and using a knife for automated cutting of meat with a robotic arm.
US 2017/0127690 A1, issued to Inoue et al, which is directed towards an automated apparatus for deboning a poultry carcass.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN L SAMPLE whose telephone number is (571)270-5925. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00am-4:00pm.
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, Adam Mott can be reached at (571)270-5376. 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.
/JONATHAN L SAMPLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657