The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 3 of par. [0030], the recitation “holding device 300” should be --30--.
Line 4 of par. [0053], referring to the Fig. 6 embodiment, states “The first element 300 and the second element 600 are pivotally connected to each other.” This is not consistent with what is actually shown in Fig. 6. While there is a linkage M3 which is pivotally connected at one end to the first element and at another end to the second element, the first and second elements are not pivotally connected to each other, as they can only move linearly toward and away from each other.
Appropriate correction is required.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: claim 6 recites “the first angle and the second angle are greater than 90 degrees and less than 180 degrees”. There is no antecedent basis for this feature in the specification, as no mention is made of any particular numerical values associated with the first and second angles. Further, it appears from at least Figs. 5A-B that the first angle is exactly, not less than, 180 degrees.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 6, 7, 13, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 6, 13 and 20 recite “the first angle and the second angle are greater than 90 degrees and less than 180 degrees”. As noted above in par. 3, there is no basis for this feature in the specification, as no mention is made of any particular numerical values associated with the first and second angles. Further, it appears from at least Figs. 5A-B that the first angle is exactly, not less than, 180 degrees.
Claims 7 and 14 recite “the first fixing element is able to horizontally move toward a center of the accommodating device, and the second fixing element is able to horizontally move toward the center of the accommodating device.” This feature is shown and described only with reference to the Fig. 6 embodiment, which is mutually exclusive of the Figs. 5A-B embodiment. However, claims 1 and 11, from which claims 7 and 14 respectively depend, recite that the first and second elements are pivotally connected to each other, a feature which is exclusive to the Figs. 5A-B embodiment. As noted above in par. 2, even though par. [0053] of the specification, referring to Fig. 6, states that “The first element 300 and the second element 600 are pivotally connected to each other”, this is not consistent with what is actually shown in Fig. 6. While there is a linkage M3 which is pivotally connected at one end to the first element and at another end to the second element, the first and second elements are not pivotally connected to each other, as they can only move linearly toward and away from each other. As such, claims 7 and 14 recite mutually exclusive features of two different embodiments.
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 1-7 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.
Claim 1, line 9, it is not clear what is meant by “when the accommodating device contains an object, the ... fixing element[s] are in contact with the object”, as not only has the accommodating device not previously been recited as having any such functionality, but also it is unclear whether the limitation would be required in a circumstance in which the accommodating device was not holding an object.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Smith et al (US 1,715,722).
Smith shows an accommodating device, comprising:
a first element 10;
a second element 11, wherein the second element is pivotally connected to the first element;
a first fixing element 19, comprising a first end 20 and a second end (not separately identified but readily apparent), wherein the first end is affixed to the first element; and
a second fixing element 15, comprising a third end 18 and a fourth end 16, wherein the third end is affixed to the second element;
wherein when the accommodating device contains an object, the first fixing element and the second fixing element are in contact with the object (Fig. 1).
Re claim 2, an elastic element 23 is disposed below (at least) the first element.
Re claim 3, a “counterweight element” 22, as broadly recited, is disposed on the first element or the second element.
Re claim 4, an elastic force of the elastic element is greater than a weight of the counterweight element (Fig. 2; lines 59-71), and less than or equal to the sum of the weight of the counterweight element and a weight of the object (Fig. 1; lines 14-19).
Re claim 5, the accommodating device is able to switch between a first state and a second state, the accommodating device is in the first state when the accommodating device contains the object (Fig. 1), and the accommodating device is in the second state when the accommodating device does not contain the object (Fig. 2), wherein in the first state, a first length is formed between the second end of the first fixing element and the fourth end of the second fixing element, wherein in the second state, a second length is formed between the second end of the first fixing element and the fourth end of the second fixing element, and the first length is less than the second length.
Re claim 6, in the first state, a first angle is formed between the first element and the second element, and in the second state, a second angle is formed between the first element and the second element, the first angle and the second angle are greater than 90 degrees and less than 180 degrees*, and the first angle is greater than the second angle. *Note: the first angle appears to actually be 180 degrees, but this is believed to be consistent with what was intended by applicant, as explained above in pars. 3 and 6.
Claims 8-10 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dan (US 2021/0339393).
Dan shows an autonomous mobile robot vehicle 100 (or 200), comprising:
a movable base 11;
an accommodating device 5, disposed on the movable base to accommodate an object 400; and
a holding device 3, disposed on the movable base and configured to pick and place the object from the accommodating device.
Re claim 9, the holding device further comprises two positioning elements 4, and the two positioning elements are in contact with the object when the holding device holds the object.
Re claim 10, when the holding device holds the object, the two positioning elements are disposed on opposite sides of the object.
Re claim 15, Dan discloses a transporting method of an electronic component, comprising:
providing an electronic component (e.g., a silicon wafer) and disposing the electronic component on a carrier 400 (e.g., a FOUP; see pars. [0004], [0047]);
providing an autonomous mobile robot vehicle 100, 200, wherein the autonomous mobile robot vehicle comprises an accommodating device 5 and a holding device 3;
using the holding device to hold the carrier (Fig. 21); and
disposing the carrier on the autonomous mobile robot vehicle, wherein when the carrier is disposed on the autonomous mobile robot vehicle, the accommodating device is in contact with the carrier (Fig. 21).
Claims 16-17 are treated as per analogous claims 9-10 above.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 11-13 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dan in view of Smith et al.
Dan does not show that the accommodating device comprises a first element, a second element pivotally connected to the first element, a first fixing element affixed to the first element, and a second fixing element affixed to the second element, the second fixing element disposed corresponding to the first fixing element, wherein when the accommodating device contains the object, the first fixing element and the second fixing element are in contact with the object.
As noted above in par. 10, Smith shows an accommodating element with these features.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus of Dan by providing the accommodating device with a first element, a second element pivotally connected to the first element, a first fixing element affixed to the first element, and a second fixing element affixed to the second element, with the second fixing element being disposed corresponding to the first fixing element, such that when the accommodating device contained the object, the first fixing element and the second fixing element were in contact with the object, as shown by Smith, to more securely hold the object in the accommodating device.
Re claims 12, 13, 19 and 20, Smith shows all of the features thereof, as also noted above in par. 10 with respect to analogous claims 5 and 6. When modified as above, such features would obviously be included in the apparatus and process of Dan.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James Keenan whose telephone number is (571)272-6925. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thurs.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at 571-270-5565. 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.
/James Keenan/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3652
8/31/26
Prosecution Insights