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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 5/21/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 9 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/21/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1 in the reply filed on 5/21/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the species allegedly do not require a different field of search. This is not found persuasive because the non-elected species require different search terms (e.g. third arm) and require different search strategies (e.g. looking for different structural arrangements when reviewing prior art references).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 7-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 5/21/2026.
In summary, claims 7-9 are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 3-4, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoneda (US2021/0178574).
Yoneda discloses:
Re claim 1. A robot comprising:
a first arm (140);
a second arm (150) rotatably coupled to the first arm (140);
a first motor (40) housed in the first arm and including a first gear (42) configured to rotate around a first axial center;
a first decelerator (30) configured to decelerate rotation of a second gear (32) and transmit the decelerated rotation to a first output shaft (34), the first decelerator including the second gear configured to rotate, in conjunction with rotation of the first gear, around a second axial center (D) parallel to the first axial center and offset from the first axial center (see Figs. 2 & 3), and the first output shaft coupled to the second arm (see para. [0013]); and
a first brake device (50) configured to brake the rotation of the first gear (42), the first brake device being housed in the first arm (140) to face the first motor (40) in a direction perpendicular to the first axial center, and including a third gear (52) configured to rotate around a third axial center parallel to the first axial center and the second axial center and offset from each of the first axial center and the second axial center, and rotate in conjunction with the first gear (42) at a position separated from the second gear (32)(See Figs. 2 & 3).
Re claim 3. The robot according to claim 1, wherein
a dimension of the first motor (40) in a direction of the first axial center is longer than a dimension of the first brake device (50) in a direction of the third axial center.
Re claim 4. The robot according to claim 1, wherein
the first decelerator (30) includes a first hollow portion (33) extending along the second axial center, in the second gear (32) and the first output shaft (34),
the first motor (40) includes a first housing disposed on an outer side in a radial direction of a first space formed by extending the first hollow portion in a direction of the second axial center (See Figs. 2 & 3), and
the first brake device (50) includes a second housing disposed on the outer side in the radial direction of the first space (See Figs. 2 & 3).
Re claim 6. The robot according to claim 1, wherein
the number of teeth of the third gear (52) is equal to or less than the number of teeth of the first gear (42) (The second gear 32 meshes with both the first gear 42 and the third gear 52. Therefore, these three gears have the same module (i.e. same size teeth). Since the diameter of the third gear 52 is smaller than the diameter of the first gear 42 (see Figs. 2-3), the number of teeth of the third gear is less than the number of teeth of the second gear.).
PNG
media_image1.png
620
541
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 5 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art is Yoneda (US2021/0178574, relied upon above).
The Examiner notes that the claim language (see claim 2) “a gap between the third gear and the second gear” is understood to require the third gear and the second gear to not be in mesh or in contact with each other at any point on the gears.
In regards to claim 2, Yoneda further discloses the first gear (42, connected to motor 40) is coupled to the second gear (32).
However, Yoneda does not disclose the third gear (52) being provided with a gap between the third gear (52, coupled to brake 50) and the second gear (32), as can be seen in Fig. 3.
Yoneda teaches away from this arrangement because Yoneda discloses a purpose of its invention is that the brake (50) is separated from the motor (40) at different positions in the circumferential direction so that the height of the motor (40) in the axial direction is reduced (see para. [0024]). Consequentially, it is necessary in Yoneda that the second gear 32 be located between the first gear 42 and the third gear 52 so that the brake (50) and the motor (40) are located apart from each other.
Therefore, there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art to modify the closest prior art to have all of the missing claim limitations, in combination with all other claim limitations, without the use of impermissible hindsight.
In regards to claim 5, Yoneda does not disclose at least one fourth gear configured to rotate around a fourth axial center parallel to the first axial center, the second axial center, and the third axial center and offset from each of the first axial center, the second axial center, and the third axial center, and transmit a braking force of the third gear (52 in Yoneda) to the first gear (42 in Yoneda), the at least one fourth gear being housed in the first arm (140 in Yoneda).
Yoneda teaches away from this arrangement at least because in Yoneda the third gear (52) and the first gear (42) are already connected by the second gear (32). Therefore, there is no need in Yoneda for a fourth gear that transmits the braking force of the third gear (52) to the first gear (42) since the second gear (32) already transmits the braking force of the third gear (52) to the first gear (42).
Therefore, there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art to modify the closest prior art to have all of the missing claim limitations, in combination with all other claim limitations, without the use of impermissible hindsight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Shinagawa (US2019/0344437) discloses a robot having arms, a motor, gears, and a braking mechanism.
Tamura (US2008/0056858) discloses a robot having arms, a motor, gears, and a braking mechanism.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY T PRATHER whose telephone number is (571)270-5412. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9 AM - 5 PM.
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 T PRATHER/
Examiner, Art Unit 3618
/MINNAH L SEOH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights