DETAILED ACTION
This is the First Office Action in response to the above identified patent
application filed on January 22, 2025.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 “the supply of fluids comes from a single source divided into two streams, a first stream for the deployment by eversion of the sleeve forming the body of the robot and a second stream supplying the sheath with fluid to create and to maintain a layer of fluid around the tubular element” (claim 6), and “the head of the tubular body carries a spatial positioning device, comprising at least one accelerometer and/or at least one gyro” (claim 10) 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.
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 1-17 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 4, the claim terminology “in particular” is not fully understood and fails to particularly point out the metes and bounds of the desired patent protection.
Claim 1, line 21, the claim terminology “with a view to applying a stream” is awkwardly worded making the claim unclear. Does applicant intend to define the operator interface being configured to supply a stream of fluid? Appropriate correction is requested.
Claim 2, line 4, the claim language “preferably being winding means” is unclear if applicant intends to positively recite the “winding means.”
Claim 8, the claim language “preferably water” is unclear if applicant intends to positively recite “water.”
Claim 12, the limitation “such as a spreader” is unclear if applicant intends to positively recite the spreader.
Claim 13, the limitation “such as pipes in a confined environment” is unclear if applicant intends to positively recite the pipes.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, 9,and 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ryu et al. (USPub 2021/0394358).
Ryu teaches a robot comprising an arm (200) deployable from a base (100) including a storage chamber (S), a control station (inherent) of said arm and an operator interface (inherent), said arm being a supple flexible pneumatic arm, comprising: a tubular body mounted on said base, said tubular body comprising a sleeve (220,240) formed of a turned back supple flexible inflatable membrane the two ends of which are fixed to said base including the storage chamber for the membrane of the sleeve, the storage chamber including at least one first inlet (a first pneumatic supply unit described at [0078]) for a fluid, termed the first stream of fluid, said sleeve being, in the non-deployed state, at least partially folded in the storage chamber and able to be inflated and to be deployed by eversion at the distal end of the tubular body of the arm, termed the apex, from said storage chamber by the action of the first stream of fluid, and, in the deployed state, forming an central inner sheath (210) along the axis of the tubular body, said sheath being able to serve for housing and passage of a flexible tubular element (310), the distal end of the tubular body of the arm, including a head equipped with at least one payload (320) carried by said tubular element and pushed during the deployment of the tubular body, and an operator interface (inherent) controlling the supply of fluid with a view to applying a stream for deployment by eversion of the sleeve from the storage chamber and thus a forward movement of the distal end of the tubular body of the arm of the robot, wherein said robot comprises a second fluid supply inlet (paragraph [0061] describes a flow is injected between the sheath 210 and an internal body 130 surrounding the tubular element 310), termed the second stream of fluid, connected to said sheath formed along the central axis of the tubular body, said second stream of fluid being able to create and to maintain a film of fluid around the tubular element in order to facilitate the introduction into and/or the movement in the sheath of said tubular element and thus the forward movement of the payload.
Claim 2: Ryu teaches the arm comprising a winding device (such as 20 in Fig. 1 or 400 in Fig. 13) for driving the sleeve out of and toward the storage chamber.
Claim 7: Ryu teaches at least one of the first and second fluid is a gas.
Claim 9: Ryu teaches the payload comprises a video camera, or at least one sensor (paragraph [0010] and [0058]).
Claim 12: Ryu teaches the storage chamber comprises a support for storing the membrane, configured to limit the friction between said storage support and said membrane, and at least one means for conditioning the membrane. Specifically, Ryu discloses (paragraph [0072]) the friction between the inner periphery (210) of the unit (200) and the cable (310) may be reduced by applying a coating with a material having a low coefficient of friction.
Claim 13: Ryu teaches (paragraph [0003] and [0058]) the robot being capable of inspecting straight or bent pipes.
Claim 14: Ryu teaches the robot being capable of transporting payloads in pipes.
Claim 15: Ryu teaches the robot being capable of operating in an industrial, sanitary, nuclear, marine, corrosive or rough environment.
Claim 16: Ryu teaches one of the first and second fluid is air.
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.
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu et al. (USPub 2021/0394358), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li (CN 109732581).
Ryu does not teach the arm having cables or cords, housed in longitudinal peripheral sheaths of the sleeve and connected to at least one traction mechanism, in order to direct and/or to orient the apex of the tubular body. Li teaches a robot arm (1) having cables or cords (2), housed in longitudinal peripheral sheaths (1-2) and connected to at least one traction mechanism (winding mechanism), in order to direct and/or to orient the apex of a tubular body. Further, Li teaches the cables have a first end of the cable fixed to the chamber (via the traction mechanism) for storing the sleeve, extends along the sheath of the tubular body, and is housed, all along said tubular body, in a longitudinal peripheral sheath, a second end of the cable or cord being connected to at least one traction mechanism; the external longitudinal peripheral sheaths housing the cables are disposed along generatrices of said tubular body. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed device to configure the robot arm of Ryu with a traction mechanism having pulling cables, as taught by Li, motivation being to direct/orient the tubular body.
Claim(s) 6, 11, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu et al. (USPub 2021/0394358), as applied to claim 1 above.
Ryu teaches different fluid sources for deploying the sleeve and supplying the sheath with fluid to provide a layer of fluid around the tubular element. However, using a single compressor (fluid source) for supplying each fluid stream is considered an obvious modification to reduce costs, reduce the number of components, and to reduce the overall complexity of the robot arrangement. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed device to configure the different fluid sources of Ryu, as a single air compressor that is divided into multiple air streams for the deployment of the sleeve and a second stream supplying the sheath with fluid to provide a layer of fluid around the tubular element, motivation being to reduce the number of fluid sources needed to control the robot.
Claim 11: It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed device to make the sleeve of Ryu of a polymer material, such as polyethylene, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Claim(s) 8, 11, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu et al. (USPub 2021/0394358), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hawkes et al. (USPub 2021/0354289).
Claim 8: Ryu teaches the robot arm using air as a fluid for controlling the arm movement, and does not teach using a liquid, such as water, for controlling the arm. The prior art to Hawkes teaches a robot arm using water for controlling the arm. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to change the fluid used by Ryu to water, as disclosed by Hawkes, motivation being to use an non-compressible fluid capable of producing a predetermined force.
Claims 11 and 17: Ryu does not teach the sleeve being made of a polymer material, such as polyethylene. However, it was known to form a robot arm with a sleeve made from the claimed material. For example, Hawkes teaches a robot arm having a sleeve (bladder) made from low density polyethylene (paragraph [0038]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed device to make the sleeve of Ryu from a polymer material, such as low density polyethylene, as taught by Hawkes, motivation being to form a flexible sleeve capable of producing a predetermined movement when subjected to fluid pressure.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu et al. (USPub 2021/0394358), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Challoner (USPub 2003/0178964).
Ryu does not teach the claimed positioning device. Challoner teaches (paragraph [0020] and elsewhere) a robot arm having a spatial positioning device with an accelerometer and/or at least one gyro. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed device to provide the robot arm of Ryu with a positioning device having a gyro, as taught by Challoner, motivation being to better control the movement of the robot art by accurately determining position of the end effector.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note the soft robotic arms disclosed in the cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM C JOYCE whose telephone number is (571)272-7107. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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.
/WILLIAM C JOYCE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618