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 § 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.
Claims 1-9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beckman et al. (US 10,384,692).
Regarding Claim 1, Beckman discloses a deployable robotic system comprising (see Fig. 1I):
A set of frames (see Fig. 1I, showing the main body of the container structure and with portions 154A and 154B) with coupler elements coupled together to form one or more pivot points (see Fig. 1I, showing that portions 154A and 154B are hinged to the container structure to open and close), the set of frames configured to (a) fold into a first structure having one or more external dimensions of an intermodal freight shipping structure (see Figs. 1D and 1I, this is the closed door configuration), and (b) unfold into a part of a robotic part forming system (see Fig. 1D and 1I, this is when the door is open) comprising:
A robotic arm (158) with a base (proximal end of the robot) coupled to a first frame of the set of frames (see Fig. 1D, showing coupling to the main body of the container), the robotic arm including an actuator system configured to control motion of the robotic arm through space (see Figs. 1G and 1H showing movement of the robotic arm, and accordingly actuator control for the robot joints).
Regarding Claim 2, Beckman further discloses the deployable robotic system of claim 1, wherein the first structure has the same height, length, and width of an intermodal freight shipping container (see Fig. 1G).
Regarding Claim 3, Beckman further discloses the deployable robotic system of claim 1, wherein the one or more external dimensions of the first structure satisfy standards for external dimensions of an intermodal freight shipping container defined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (see Fig. 1I, showing a standard intermodal freight shipping container being moved by a train).
Regarding Claim 4, Beckman further discloses the deployable robotic system of claim 1, wherein the set of frames includes corner coupling mechanisms of an intermodal freight shipping container, the corner coupling mechanisms configured to couple the first structure to an intermodal freight shipping container (see Fig. 1I, the portion 154A and 154B are hinged to the container and accordingly are corner coupling mechanisms).
Regarding Claim 5, Beckman further discloses the deployable robotic system of claim 4, wherein the corner coupling mechanisms are corner castings of an intermodal freight shipping container (see Fig. 1I).
Regarding Claim 6, Beckman further discloses the deployable robotic system of claim 4, wherein the corner coupling mechanisms satisfy standards for corner coupling mechanisms of an intermodal freight shipping container (see Fig. 1I, showing the container being shipped by train and accordingly would have to satisfy the standards).
Regarding Claim 7, Beckman further discloses the deployable robotic system of claim 1, wherein the first structure is certified as an intermodal freight shipping container (see Fig. 1I, showing the container being shipped by train and accordingly would have to satisfy the certification standards).
Regarding Claim 8, Beckman further discloses the deployable robotic system of claim 1, wherein the first structure has a total mass that satisfies a maximum gross mass rating for an intermodal freight shipping container showing the container being shipped by train and accordingly would have to gross mas rating standards).
Regarding Claim 9, Beckman further discloses the deployable robotic system of claim 1, wherein the first structure has a stacking strength that satisfies a stacking strength standard for an intermodal freight shipping container (see Fig. 1I, showing the container being shipped by train and accordingly would have to satisfy the stacking strength standards).
Regarding Claim 16, Beckman further disclose the deployable robotic system of claim 1, wherein, in a folded configuration of the set of frames, the part of the robotic part forming system is within the first structure (see Fig. 1D).
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.
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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beckman et al. (US 10,384,692) in view of Guerin et al. (US 10,657,802).
Regarding Claim 11, Beckman does not disclose a control panel for the robotic forming system of the deployable robotic system of claim 1.
However, Guerin teaches providing a robot with a control panel (see Col. 1 Lines 63-67), the control panel comprising a user interface element configured to control an aspect of the robotic arm (see Col. 1 Lines 63-67).
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 deployable robotic system disclosed in Beckman with a control panel for the robot as taught in Guerin to allow for easy programming of the robot.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 12-15, and 17-20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY WEBER whose telephone number is (571)272-3307. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM M-F.
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) 270-7778. 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.
/GREGORY ROBERT WEBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights