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 .
Drawings
The drawings are not of sufficient quality to permit examination. Accordingly, replacement drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to this Office action. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. NOTE: The drawings are shaded grey black in some areas causing difficulty to see and understand the drawings. Black lined drawings on white paper are preferred.
Applicant is given a shortened statutory period of TWO (2) MONTHS to submit new drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.81. Extensions of time may be obtained under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a) but in no case can any extension carry the date for reply to this letter beyond the maximum period of SIX MONTHS set by statute (35 U.S.C. 133). Failure to timely submit replacement drawing sheets will result in ABANDONMENT of the application.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “robot cluster” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because, in Fig. 3(b), reference character “6” is used to show portions of the branch chain and not “four side plates” as stated in paragraph [0070] of the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
A preliminary examination of this application reveals that it includes terminology which is so different from that which is generally accepted in the art to which this invention pertains that a proper search of the prior art cannot be made. For example:
screw, screw axis, wrench, wrench system, twist, twist system, and robot cluster.
Applicant is required to provide a clarification of these matters or correlation with art-accepted terminology so that a proper comparison with the prior art can be made. Applicant should be careful not to introduce any new matter into the disclosure (i.e., matter which is not supported by the disclosure as originally filed).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire TWO (2) MONTHS from the mailing date of this letter.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 43, “a eleventh connecting rod” should be “an eleventh connecting rod”.. 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 – 11 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.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “robot cluster” in claim 11 is used by the claim however, the meaning is unclear. The accepted meaning is “A concentration of robotics-related businesses, research institutions, and support services in a specific geographic area.” (See http://higrc.org, https://www.roboticsclusters.org , and https://www.kollmorgen.com/en-us/blogs/what-is-a-robotic-cluster ). The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term. None of the drawings provide an image of “robot cluster”. Claim 11, itself does not define the term.
Claims 3 and 4 include the limitation “constraint wench system” and it is not clear if this refers to a constraint or a wench. The specification does not provide a definition for the term “constraint wench system”.
Claim 4 uses the term “constraint force screw” which is unclear because nowhere do the claims, specification nor drawings define “constraint force screw”. Also, the specification uses the term “screw” outside of its ordinary meaning, as a fastener, and without defining the new meaning.
Furthermore, the terms “twist” and “twisting” are used throughout claims 1 – 4. Applicant does not differentiate the term “twist” from the term “screw” because neither term is explicitly defined by the disclosure, therefore, the terms are unclear.
Claims 2 – 11 depend from rejected claim 1, and therefore, is also rejected for the same reasons.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 – 11 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.
Regarding claim 1, patent application publication number US 2022/0234192 A1 to Xu discloses a transmission mechanism (redundant parallel mechanism 100) of a robot, wherein the transmission mechanism is a parallel mechanism with three branch chains (multiple redundant branch chain 3 and multiple moving branch chain 4) and two degrees of freedom (multi-degree-of freedom, Paragraph [0021]), and comprises:
a fixed platform (fixed platform 1) and a moving platform (moving platform 3).
However, Xu does not disclose:
a constraint limb comprising a first rotating joint S11 and a second rotating joint S12, which generate functions of constraining a lifting motion and a twisting motion of the moving platform, respectively;
a first actuation limb comprising third to seventh rotating joints S21-S25, wherein the third rotating joint S21 is an actuation joint and the fourth to seventh rotating joints are transmission rotating joints; and
a second actuation limb comprising eighth to twelfth rotating joints S31-S35, wherein the eighth rotating joint S31 is an actuation joint, and the ninth to twelfth rotating joints are transmission rotating joints;
wherein when movements of the third rotating joint S21 and the eighth rotating joint S31 are synchronized, the moving platform of the transmission mechanism generates the lifting motion relative to the fixed platform, allowing the micro crawling robot to move forward; and
when movements of the third rotating joint S21 and the eighth rotating joint S31 are out of synchronization, the moving platform of the transmission mechanism generates the twisting motion relative to the fixed platform, allowing the micro crawling robot to turn, and wherein moving axes of the lifting motion and the twisting motion are orthogonal;
wherein the first rotating joint S11 is arranged on the fixed platform;
the second rotating joint S12 is arranged on the moving platform, perpendicular to the first rotating joint S11 and connected via a second connecting rod;
the third rotating joint S21 is arranged on the fixed platform, parallel to the first rotating joint S11, and serves as an actuation joint;
the fourth rotating joint S22 is arranged parallel to the first rotating joint S11 and connected to the third rotating joint S21 via a fourth connecting rod;
the fifth rotating joint S23 is arranged parallel to the first rotating joint S11 and connected to the fourth rotating joint S22 via a fifth connecting rod;
the sixth rotating joint S24 is arranged parallel to the second rotating joint S12 and connected to the fifth rotating joint S23 via a sixth connecting rod;
the seventh rotating joint S25 is arranged on the moving platform, parallel to the second rotating joint S12, and connected to the sixth rotating joint S24 via a seventh connecting rod;
the eighth rotating joint S31 is arranged on the fixed platform, parallel to the first rotating joint S11, and serves as an actuation joint;
the ninth rotating joint S32 is arranged parallel to the first rotating joint S11 and connected to the eighth rotating joint S31 via a ninth connecting rod;
the tenth rotating joint S33 is arranged parallel to the first rotating joint S11 and connected to the ninth rotating joint S32 via a tenth connecting rod;
the eleventh rotating joint S34 is arranged parallel to the second rotating joint S12 and connected to the tenth rotating joint S33 via an eleventh connecting rod; and
the twelfth rotating joint S35 is arranged on the moving platform, parallel to the second rotating joint S12, and connected to the eleventh rotating joint S34 via a twelfth connecting rod.
Claims 2 – 11 depend from claim 1, and therefore, would also be allowable.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Felicia L Brittman-Alabi whose telephone number is (313)446-6512. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-6.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at (571)272-6265. 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.
/Felicia L. Brittman-Alabi/ Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/VALENTIN NEACSU, Ph.D./ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611
