DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 01/12/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-14 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 10/31/2025.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Garrec (US 20150096392 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Garrec discloses a transmission mechanism (see Fig. 4) configured to be interposed between a drive device (23) and a driven member (14) configured to be driven by a torque outputted by the drive device, the transmission mechanism comprising: a flexible shaft (1’) having an input end receiving the torque outputted by the drive device and an output end outputting the torque; a conversion mechanism (16) having an input shaft (1) supported by a link member (12) via a first bearing (bearing between 12 and 20) in a rotatable but axially immovable manner and configured to receive the torque from the flexible shaft, a converter (20, 21) for converting the torque of the input shaft into an axial force, and an output member (17) outputting the axial force provided by the converter; and a blocking device (30) that allows the transmission of the torque from the flexible shaft to the input shaft but blocks transmission of an axial force from the flexible shaft to the input shaft (see Fig. 4), wherein a direction of extension of a rotation axis at a joint between the flexible shaft and the input shaft is the same as a direction of linear motion of the output member (see Fig. 4, wherein clockwise rotation of first segment 12 to be coaxial with the segment between 11 and 12 would result in a direction of extension of a rotation axis at a joint between the flexible shaft 1’ and the input shaft 1 to be the same as a direction of linear motion of the output member 17).
Regarding claim 2, Garrec discloses the conversion mechanism (20) includes a screw shaft (20) that forms a part of the input shaft (1) and a nut (21) threading with the screw shaft and forms a part of the output member (17).
Regarding claim 3, Garrec discloses the screw shaft (20) is rotatably supported by the first bearing (bearing between 12 and 20) which is axially immovably supported by the link member (12), and the blocking device (30) is provided between the screw shaft and the flexible shaft (1’).
Regarding claim 4, Garrec discloses the blocking device (30) includes a coupling for connecting the screw shaft (20) to the flexible shaft (1’) in an axially movable but rotationally fast manner, and a second bearing (bearing on 32) supporting the flexible shaft on the link member (12) in a freely rotatable but axially immovable manner (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 5, Garrec discloses the coupling (30) includes a spline coupling (see paragraph [0025], wherein splined shaft 31…splined bushing 33).
Regarding claim 8, Garrec discloses a robot (see paragraph [0001], wherein the invention relates to a cable cylinder with an offset motor using a flexible transmission, and to a robotized arm using such a cylinder), comprising: the transmission mechanism according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above); a base member (11) supporting the drive device (23) and movably supporting the link member (12); and the driven member (14) connected to the output member (17) in an actuatable manner (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 9, Garrec discloses the blocking device (30) includes a coupling (31, 33) that is coupled to the flexible shaft (1’) in a rotationally fixed and axially immovable manner (see Fig. 4), and coupled to the input shaft (1) in a rotationally fixed and axially movable manner (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 10, Garrect discloses the coupling (31, 33) includes a cylindrical portion (33) having a bottom wall at one end (see Fig. 4; right side wall of 33), wherein the cylindrical portion engages with the input shaft (1), and wherein a gap is formed in an axial direction between the bottom wall and the input shaft (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 11, Garrec discloses the blocking device (30) further includes a second bearing (see Fig. 4; bearing of 32) rotatably supporting the coupling, wherein the coupling is rotatably supported by the second bearing and further includes a shaft portion (31) disposed coaxially with the cylindrical portion (33), wherein the flexible shaft (1’) is coupled to the shaft portion, and wherein the bottom wall of the cylindrical portion (right side wall of 33) is provided on a side of the second bearing with respect to the input shaft (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Garrec discloses a distance between the bottom wall of the cylindrical portion (right side wall of 33) and the second bearing (bearing of 32) is shorter than a distance between the bottom wall of the cylindrical portion and the first bearing (bearing between 12 and 20).
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 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrec (US 20150096392 A1) in view of Shui (US 5656903 A).
Regarding claim 6, Garrec fails to disclose a load sensor. However, Shui teaches a load sensor (see Fig. 2; 68, 70). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Garrec with a load sensor, as taught by Shui, to detect the force applied to the load by the master actuator and provide a signal representing that force to the input of a controller (see column 4 lines 22-26). As a result of the combination, the following limitations would necessarily result: the load sensor (Shui; 68, 70) provided between the link member (Garrec; 12) and the first bearing (Garrec; bearing between 12 and 20) to measure an axial load of the screw shaft (Garrec, 20).
Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrec (US 20150096392 A1) in view of Joline (US 1649310 A).
Regarding claim 7, Garrec fails to disclose the flexible shaft includes a plurality of wire coils wound in a plurality of coaxial layers and in alternating directions. However, Joline teaches the flexible shaft (see Fig. 4) includes a plurality of wire coils (coils of 1, 2, 3) wound in a plurality of coaxial layers (1, 2, 3) and in alternating directions (see Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Garrec with a flexible shaft that includes a plurality of wire coils would in a plurality of coaxial layers and in an alternating directions, as taught by Joline, to reduce rotational forces and increase stability and so that the torsional forces of each layer counteract each other preventing the shaft from spinning or twisting under load.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 14 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record, Garrec (US 20150096392 A1), does not anticipate that “the input shaft is formed to be less flexible than the flexible shaft” as recited in claim 13; or “the flexible shaft is directly coupled to the coupling, wherein the coupling is directly coupled to the input shaft, and wherein the input shaft is directly coupled to the output member” as recited in claim 14. The prior art of record does not provide any teaching, suggestion or motivation to modify toward the entirety of applicant's claimed invention. Further, there was no cogent reasoning elsewhere available to one of ordinary skill that was unequivocally independent of improper hindsight of applicant's invention and that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify the prior art to obtain the applicant' s invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that the instant application has structural and functional differences from Garrec. However, the claims of the instant application do not recite the supposed structural and functional differences. As noted in the rejection of claim 1 above, Garrec discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that Garrec fails to disclose the technical concept of axial-force blocking for control accuracy, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Garrec discloses a spline connection between two shafts that allows torque transfer and axial sliding, i.e., blocking axial force from one shaft to another. Again, the specifics Applicant argues are not present in the claims. As such, Garrec discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that Garrec fails to disclose an alignment of the direction of extension of a rotation axis at a joint between a flexible shaft and an input shaft with the direction of linear motion of an output member, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted in the rejection of claim 1 above, the robot arm of Garrec can be moved such that the directions align. As such, Garrec discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
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 JOSEPH BROWN whose telephone number is (313)446-6568. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8:00am - 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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 571-357-2384. 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.
/JOSEPH BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618