DETAILED ACTION
This application is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 6: The metes and bounds of the limitation “close contact” (Line 7) are unclear. How close is close?
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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, 7, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,375,480 to Nihei et al., which discloses:
Claim 1: A robot comprising:
a first link 12;
a second link 18, 20 aligned with the first link 12 along a [first] rotation axis (the rotation axis extends along motor M1) and extending away from the [first] rotation axis; and
an actuator M1 accommodated in the first link 12 to rotate the second link 18, 20 around the [first] rotation axis with respect to the first link 12, wherein
the second link 18, 20 includes a first sub-link 18 and a second sub-link 20 that sandwich the actuator M1 along the [first] rotation axis,
the first sub-link 18 is attached to the actuator M1, and
the second sub-link 20 is attached to the first sub-link 18 in a state where the second sub-link 20 is not constrained from the first link 12 in a direction crossing the [first] rotation axis.
Claim 7: The robot according to claim 1, further comprising:
a third link 22 aligned with the second link 18, 20 along a second rotation axis parallel to the [first] rotation axis and extending away from the second rotation axis; and
a second actuator M2 accommodated in the third link 22 to rotate the third link 22 with respect to the second link 18, 20, wherein
the first sub-link 18 and the second sub-link 20 sandwich the second actuator M2 along the second rotation axis,
the first sub-link 18 is attached to the second actuator M2, and
the second sub-link 20 is attached to the first sub-link 18 in a state of not being constrained from the first link 12 in the direction crossing the [first] rotation axis and not being constrained from the third link 22 in a direction crossing the second rotation axis.
Claim 12: The robot according to claim 1, further comprising:
a base link 10 fixed to an installation surface, wherein
the first link 12 is connected to the base link 10 to rotate around a turning axis crossing the [first] rotation axis.
Claims 1 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1J) as being anticipated by Japanese Patent Publication No. 5225658 B2 to Shibaura Machine Co., which discloses:
Claim 1: A robot comprising:
a first link 12;
a second link 13B, 13A aligned with the first link 12 along a [first] rotation axis (the rotation axis extends along motor 22) and extending away from the [first] rotation axis; and
an actuator 22 accommodated in the first link 12 to rotate the second link 13B, 13A around the [first] rotation axis with respect to the first link 12, wherein
the second link 13B, 13A includes a first sub-link 13B and a second sub-link 13A that sandwich the actuator 22 along the [first] rotation axis,
the first sub-link 13B is attached to the actuator 22, and
the second sub-link 13A is attached to the first sub-link 13B in a state where the second sub-link 13A is not constrained from the first link 12 in a direction crossing the [first] rotation axis.
Claim 13: The robot according to claim 1, wherein the first sub-link 13B is made of a first material (the attached machine translation discloses “One of the arm members 13B is an arm that receives the load of the robot, and is made of a metal material”), and the second sub-link 13A is made of a second material having rigidity and specific gravity smaller than the first material (the attached machine translation discloses “the plate-like structure 13D is disposed between the second rotation axis A 2 and the third rotation axis A 3 and is made of a metal material such as aluminum. On the other hand, the enclosure 13C can be made of a relatively light and soft material such as a synthetic resin material, an elastic rubber material (especially a silicon rubber material), a wood material, or a paper material”).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
Claims 2-6 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5,375,480 to Nihei et al., as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0181662 A1 to Cao.
Claim 2: Nihei discloses the robot according to claim 1, wherein
the first link 12 includes
an internal space (see FIG. 2) configured to accommodate the actuator M1, and
an opening (see FIG. 2) configured to allow the internal space and an outside of the internal space to communicate with each other.
Nihei does not disclose wherein the robot further comprises a seal interposed between the second sub-link 20 and the first link 12 around the opening.
The Office turns to Cao, which teaches a robot joint in which a seal 100 is interposed between a first component 201 and a second component 202. Multiple motivations for the seal 100 are described in Paragraph [0042]:
With the sealing assembly 100 arranged between the first component 201 and second component 202, as shown in FIG. 1, there is no slot, sharp edge or sharp angle that causes the joint to be hard to clean. In this way, the joint can be easily cleaned and a good cleaning effect is achieved while ensuring the sealing performance. Furthermore, the sealing assembly 100 according to embodiments of the present disclosure has the advantages of fewer parts, easy processing, simple assembly and low tolerance requirements for workpieces.
In view of the Cao teaching, the Office finds that it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of filing to modify, with a reasonable expectation of success, the robot disclosed by Nihei, so as to further comprise a seal interposed between the second sub-link 20 and the first link 12 around the opening, in order to provide a joint that can be easily cleaned while ensuring sealing performance, as taught by Cao.
Claim 3: The robot disclosed by Nihei further comprises a cable harness 58 connected to at least the actuator M1 (via connector 36; see FIG. 2), wherein the second sub-link 20 includes a wiring space 64 for guiding the cable harness 58. Thus, Claim 3 is rendered obvious over the combination of Nihei and Cao.
Claim 4: The robot disclosed by Nihei is characterized wherein
the opening allows the internal space to communicate with the wiring space 64, and
the cable harness 58 is wired through the opening and the wiring space 64. Thus, Claim 4 is rendered obvious over the combination of Nihei and Cao.
Claim 5: The seal taught by Cao is configured to be interposed between two links while allowing relative displacement between the two links.
According to the modification of Nihei described in the rejection of Claim 2 above, so as to include a seal in view of the Cao teaching, the seal (taught by Cao) is configured to be interposed between the second sub-link 20 and the first link 12 while allowing relative displacement between the second sub-link 20 and the first link 12 in the direction crossing the [first] rotation axis, in order to provide a joint that can be easily cleaned while ensuring sealing performance, as taught by Cao.
Claim 6: The seal taught by Cao includes[:]
a sealing surface 101 along a plane crossing a rotation axis, and
a sealing element 102 configured to be displaced along the sealing surface in accordance with the relative displacement between two links while being in close contact with the sealing surface.
According to the modification of Nihei described in the rejection of Claim 2 above, so as to include a seal in view of the Cao teaching, the Office finds that the seal (taught by Cao) includes[:]
a sealing surface along a plane crossing the [first] rotation axis, and
a sealing element configured to be displaced along the sealing surface in accordance with the relative displacement between the second sub-link 20 and the first link 12 while being in close contact with the sealing surface,
in order to provide a joint that can be easily cleaned while ensuring sealing performance, as taught by Cao.
Claim 8: Nihei discloses the robot according to claim 7, wherein the first link 12 includes[:]
[a first] internal space configured to accommodate the actuator M1, and
[a first] opening configured to allow the [first] internal space and an outside of the [first] internal space to communicate with each other,
the third link 22 includes[:]
a second internal space configured to accommodate the second actuator M2, and
a second opening configured to allow the second internal space and an outside of the second internal space to communicate with each other.
Nihei does not disclose wherein the robot further comprises a seal interposed between the second sub-link 20 and the first link 12 around the [first] opening, and a second seal interposed between the second sub-link 20 and the third link 22 around the second opening.
The Office turns to Cao, which teaches a robot joint in which a seal 100 is interposed between a first component 201 and a second component 202. Multiple motivations for the seal 100 are described in Paragraph [0042] (cited above in the rejection of Claim 2).
In view of the Cao teaching, the Office finds that it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of filing to modify, with a reasonable expectation of success, the robot disclosed by Nihei, so as to further comprise a [first] seal interposed between the second sub-link 20 and the first link 12 around the [first] opening, and a second seal interposed between the second sub-link 20 and the third link 22 around the second opening, in order to provide a joint that can be easily cleaned while ensuring sealing performance, as taught by Cao.
Claim 9: The robot disclosed by Nihei further comprises a cable harness 58 connected to at least the second actuator M2 (via connector 38; see FIG. 2) via the [first] internal space, wherein
the second sub-link 20 includes a wiring space 64 for guiding the cable harness 58 from the [first] internal space to the second actuator M2. Thus, Claim 9 is rendered obvious over the combination of Nihei and Cao.
Claim 10: The robot disclosed by Nihei is characterized wherein
the [first] opening allows the [first] internal space to communicate with the wiring space 64,
the second opening allows the second internal space to communicate with the wiring space 64, and
the cable harness 58 is wired from the [first] internal space to the second internal space through the [first] opening, the wiring space 64, and the second opening.
Thus, Claim 10 is rendered obvious over the combination of Nihei and Cao.
Claim 11: The seal taught by Cao is configured to be interposed between two links while allowing relative displacement between the two links.
According to the modification of Nihei described in the rejection of Claim 8 above, so as to include a seal in view of the Cao teaching, the [first] seal (taught by Cao) is configured to be interposed between the second sub-link 20 and the first link 12 while allowing relative displacement between the second sub-link 20 and the first link 12 in the direction crossing the [first] rotation axis, and
the second seal (taught by Cao) is configured to be interposed between the second sub-link 20 and the third link 22 while allowing relative displacement between the second sub-link 20 and the third link 22 in a direction crossing the second rotation axis,
in order to provide a joint that can be easily cleaned while ensuring sealing performance, as taught by Cao.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RANDELL J KRUG whose telephone number is (313) 446-6577. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9:00-14:00 AZ time.
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 on 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.
/RANDELL J KRUG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618