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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” “Disclosed are,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (KR101873709B1) (“Kwak”) in view of Heimberg (US 2022/0212351). These rejections are based on the EPO search opinion mailed on 9/23/2025. Kwak discloses:
PNG
media_image1.png
392
474
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
56
516
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 7: a pair of link members (at leaders 100/250 in figure 1) that is arranged to be crossed;
a first link member connecting part (220) that has a hinge structure and fixes the link member and the battery cell gripper to rotate the link member; and
a second link member connecting part that has the hinge structure and is coupled to each of the pair of link members to rotate the link member (263).
Kwak does not directly show:
PNG
media_image3.png
20
322
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: wherein the guide groove is formed at each end of the panel in a direction perpendicular to a moving direction of the panel;
Claim 3: wherein the guide grooves are formed in a diagonal shape in which ends of each of the guide grooves move closer to each other;
Claim 4: wherein the grip projection includes a fixed axis and a rotating roller arranged outside the fixed axis;
Claim 5: wherein the rotating roller is in contact with one surface of the guide groove and moves the guide groove according to the raising and lowering of the panel;
Claim 6: wherein the guide groove is formed in the panel in the same direction as a moving direction of the panel.
Heimberg shows a similar device having:
PNG
media_image4.png
56
516
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: wherein the guide groove is formed at each end of the panel in a direction perpendicular to a moving direction of the panel;
PNG
media_image5.png
54
478
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 3: wherein the guide grooves are formed in a diagonal shape in which ends of each of the guide grooves move closer to each other (FIG. 12-13);
Claim 4: wherein the grip projection includes a fixed axis and a rotating roller arranged outside the fixed axis (FIG. 12-13; para. [0093], “rotatably mounted disc, in particular in the form of a ball bearing”; 25 is a type of rotating roller);
PNG
media_image6.png
16
348
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 5: wherein the rotating roller is in contact with one surface of the guide groove and moves the guide groove according to the raising and lowering of the panel;
PNG
media_image6.png
16
348
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 6: wherein the guide groove is formed in the panel in the same direction as a moving direction of the panel;
PNG
media_image5.png
54
478
media_image5.png
Greyscale
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of reliably gripping under restricted space conditions and gripping variably sized structures (para. [0018]/[0020]/[0033]) Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kwak as taught by Heimberg and include Heimberg’s similar device having:
PNG
media_image3.png
20
322
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: wherein the guide groove is formed at each end of the panel in a direction perpendicular to a moving direction of the panel;
Claim 3: wherein the guide grooves are formed in a diagonal shape in which ends of each of the guide grooves move closer to each other;
Claim 4: wherein the grip projection includes a fixed axis and a rotating roller arranged outside the fixed axis;
Claim 5: wherein the rotating roller is in contact with one surface of the guide groove and moves the guide groove according to the raising and lowering of the panel;
Claim 6: wherein the guide groove is formed in the panel in the same direction as a moving direction of the panel
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of reliably gripping under restricted space conditions and gripping variably sized structures.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 8979151 discloses grip parts 13/14.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gerald McClain whose telephone number is (571)272-7803. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and at gerald.mcclain@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03 (II)).
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272-7097. 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.
/Gerald McClain/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
