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 .
Drawings
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 idler (claim 11) 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 § 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 1-3, 5-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over So (JP 2013006238) in view of Hayakawa (WO 2020/136890).
Regarding claim 1, So discloses and shows at Figs. 2-3b a robot comprising:
a base (3);
a first arm (7) rotatably connected to the base around a first turning axis; and
a second arm (9) rotatably connected to the first arm around a second turning axis;
the second arm having:
a motor (23)
a first pulley (25) configured to rotate around a first axis and connected to the motor;
a second pulley (17a) disposed to be separated from the first pulley and configured to
rotate around a second axis parallel to the first axis;
a first belt (26) laid around the first pulley and the second pulley;
a third pulley (17b) disposed coaxially with the second pulley in a direction along the
second axis and configured to rotate around the second axis;
a shaft (17c) extending along the second axis;
a fourth pulley (16) disposed to be separated from the third pulley, the fourth pulley
configured to rotate around a third turning axis that is parallel to the second axis;
a second belt (22) laid around the third pulley and the fourth pulley;
a spline shaft (15) inserted through the fourth pulley at least rotatably around the third turning axis;
a first bearing (18) located at the second pulley and the third pulley and in contact
with the shaft, and wherein
an outer diameter of the second pulley (17a) is larger than an outer diameter of the first pulley (25),
an outer diameter of the third pulley (17b) is smaller than the outer diameter of the second pulley (17a),
an outer diameter of the fourth pulley (16) is larger than the outer diameter of the third pulley (16).
So does not specify second bearings arranged on the shaft. Hayakawa discloses and shows at Fig. 2, for example, a robot having a plurality of pulleys, a first bearing (either of two bearings) located between a second pulley (61b) and a third pulley (84a) and in contact with a shaft (94), and a second bearing in contact with the shaft (at bottom end of shaft), wherein the third pulley (84a) is sandwiched between the first bearing and the second bearing, and when the second bearing is viewed along a direction perpendicular to the second axis, the second bearing does not overlap the third pulley.
The pulley and bearing arrangement provides support for the second and third pulleys as well as the supporting transmission shaft. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the So robot with a pulley and bearing arrangement as taught by Hayakawa to support the second and third pulleys as well as the supporting transmission shaft.
Cl. 2 – when the shaft is viewed along the direction perpendicular to the second axis, the second pulley does not overlap the first bearing along the direction perpendicular to the second axis (So).
Cl. 3 – the So robot further comprises a first bearing supporting section (19) fixed to the second arm and supporting the first bearing (18).
Cl. 5 – the So robot further comprises a joint actuator (10) connecting the first arm and the second arm.
Cl. 6 – the motor has a motor body and an output shaft, and when the motor body is viewed along a direction perpendicular to the first axis, the motor body does not overlap with the first bearing (motor body does not overlap as the first bearing is arranged on the shaft along the second axis which is parallel to the first axis upon which the motor is arranged according to claim 1).
Cl. 7 – the motor has a motor body and an output shaft, and when the motor body is viewed along a direction perpendicular to the first axis, the motor body does not overlap with the third pulley (motor body does not overlap as the third pulley is arranged on the shaft along the second axis which is parallel to the first axis upon which the motor is arranged according to claim 1).
Cl. 8 – a rigidity of the second belt is larger than a rigidity of the first belt (So) according to the tension applied to the belts during assembly and maintenance.
Cl. 9 – when the second arm is viewed along a first straight line parallel to the second axis, the first axis is offset from a second straight line passing through the third axis and extending along a longitudinal direction of the second arm, and a distance between the second straight line and the second axis equal to a distance between the second straight line and the first axis (So, Fig. 3a).
Having the distance between the second straight line and the second axis less than the distance between the second straight line and the first axis is found to be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A), which states, “limitations relating to the size are not sufficient to be patentably distinguishable over the prior art” in citing In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976) and also states, “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” in citing Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Cl. 12 – So discloses and shows at Figs. 2-3b a robot comprising:
a base (3);
a first arm (7) rotatably connected to the base around a first turning axis; and
a second arm (9) rotatably connected to the first arm around a second turning axis;
the second arm having:
a motor (23)
a first pulley (25) configured to rotate around a first axis and connected to the motor;
a second pulley (17a) disposed to be separated from the first pulley and configured to
rotate around a second axis parallel to the first axis;
a first belt (26) laid around the first pulley and the second pulley;
a third pulley (17b) disposed coaxially with the second pulley in a direction along the
second axis and configured to rotate around the second axis;
a shaft (17c) extending along the second axis;
a fourth pulley (16) disposed to be separated from the third pulley, the fourth pulley
configured to rotate around a third turning axis that is parallel to the second axis;
a second belt (22) laid around the third pulley and the fourth pulley;
a first bearing (18) located at the second pulley and the third pulley and in contact
with the shaft, and wherein
the first pulley transmits the power to the fourth pulley;
an outer diameter of the second pulley (17a) is larger than an outer diameter of the first pulley (25),
an outer diameter of the third pulley (17b) is smaller than the outer diameter of the second pulley (17a),
an outer diameter of the fourth pulley (16) is larger than the outer diameter of the third pulley (16).
So does not specify second bearings arranged on the shaft. Hayakawa discloses and shows at Fig. 2, for example, a robot having a plurality of pulleys, a first bearing (either of two bearings) located between a second pulley (61b) and a third pulley (84a) and in contact with a shaft (94), and a second bearing in contact with the shaft (at bottom end of shaft), wherein the third pulley (84a) is sandwiched between the first bearing and the second bearing, and when the second bearing is viewed along a direction perpendicular to the second axis, the second bearing does not overlap the third pulley.
The pulley and bearing arrangement provides support for the second and third pulleys as well as the supporting transmission shaft. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the So robot with a pulley and bearing arrangement as taught by Hayakawa to support the second and third pulleys as well as the supporting transmission shaft.
Claims 4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over So in view of Hayakawa as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Chen et al. (CN 106426150).
So and Hayakawa discloses and shows the invention of claim 1 as described elsewhere above. Neither specifically shows the second bearing fixed to the second arm (though one of ordinary skill may deduce that the shafts from So have to be attached to the bottom of the second arm in some typical manner). However, Chen discloses and shows a robot having an arm portion having therein a first pulley (7), a second pulley (12) disposed to be separated from the first pulley, a first belt (11) laid around the first pulley and the second pulley, a third pulley (14) disposed coaxially with the second pulley along a shaft (13), and further comprising a second bearing supporting section (Figs. 1 and 3, at shaft 13, not labeled) fixed to the second arm and supporting the second bearing, the second bearing being fixed to the second arm. The second bearing providing rigid support for the shaft and pulleys relative to the arm portion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the So/Hayakawa robot to add a bearing supporting section fixed to the second arm and supporting the second bearing, the second bearing being fixed to the second arm so as to provide rigid support for the shaft and pulleys relative to the arm portion.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over So in view of Hayakawa as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Gilchrist et al. (US 10,065,307).
So and Hayakawa discloses and shows the invention of claim 1 as described elsewhere above. So includes an assembly (41,43, for example) to adjust the tension of one of the belts. Gilchrist includes an idler that applies a desired tension to a belt to ensure the proper amount of torque is transferred. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the So/Hayakawa robot to include an idler to apply a desired tension to the second belt to ensure the proper amount of torque is transferred.
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments with respect to the rejected claims have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BOBBY RUSHING, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8AM-5PM EST.
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.
/BOBBY RUSHING, JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618