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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the last line of claim 1 “both (i) and (i)” are redundant if true. The examiner assumes the applicant is trying to claim “both (i) and (ii)” instead.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 1-6 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. The limitation of claim 1 last line “or both (i) and (i)” is indefinite since it is unclear what the applicant is attempting to cover. The limitation of claim 1 already includes the limitation of “(i) a rotational actuators; and ….” and “(ii) a plurality of linear actuators; and …”. Limitation of (i) and (ii) are not optional; it is unclear what the applicant meant by including the limitation “or both (i) and (i)”. A literal interpretation would require a system that consists solely of rotational actuators that only control the yaw motion of the simulated head. However, this interpretation is inconsistent with the applicant’s specification (see paragraph 58 and 105).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The limitation of claim 1 already include the limitation “wherein the plurality of neck actuators comprises: both (i) and (i)”. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-20 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Independent limitation of claim 7 and 14 requires a patient with a simulated neck having two different kind of actuators:
a rotational actuators to impart the yaw motion to the simulated head of the patient simulator, the simulated head being operably coupled to the neck linkage assembly of the simulated neck;
a plurality of linear actuators to impart the pitch and roll motions to the simulated head of the patient simulator, at least a pair of the segmented series of links being pivotably interconnected to guide the movement of the neck linkage assembly to impart the pitch motion to the simulated head, and at least another pair of the segmented series of links being pivotably interconnected to guide the movement of the neck linkage assembly to impart the roll motion to the simulated head.
Several prior arts were identified: Ding US 20210331323, Ke CN 103203754, Zhu CN 110103234, and Rodriguez US 20210225203.
The Ding reference provides a teaching of a rotational actuators to impart the yaw motion to the simulated head of the patient simulator (see paragraph 46 “the rotary motor 16 is at rest or rotates the rotary stage 0 degrees (e.g., a default position), the yaw angle of the upper platform 11 is 0 degrees. As shown in FIG. 2B, the rotary motor 16 drives the rotary stage 15 to rotate 45 degrees, thereby synchronously driving the upper platform 11 to rotate 45 degrees” and a plurality of linear actuators to impart the pitch and roll motions to the simulated head of the patient simulator (see paragraph 47 “e first linear actuator 12 and the second linear actuator 13 are both controlled to have a same length that is shorter or longer than the support shaft 14, and the second joint 122 and the fourth joint 132 are controlled to move together, at a same angle, to pitch the upper platform 11 to realize a pitch DOF of the neck mechanism 1 for the robot 2” and paragraph 56 “first linear actuator 12 and the second actuator 13 are controlled to retract or extend for a same length in opposite directions to have different lengths from each other to roll the upper platform 11 to realize a roll DOF of the neck mechanism 1 for the robot 2. “).
However, the Ding reference fails to provide a teaching of “… the neck linkage assembly of the simulated neck” and “… a pair of the segmented series of links being pivotably interconnected to guide the movement of the neck linkage assembly to impart the pitch motion to the simulated head, and at least another pair of the segmented series of links being pivotably interconnected to guide the movement of the neck linkage assembly to impart the roll motion to the simulated head”.
The Ke, Zhu, and Rodriguez reference provides a teaching of the segmented series of links being pivotably interconnected to guide the movement of the neck linkage assembly to impart the pitch motion to the simulated head, and at least another pair of the segmented series of links being pivotably interconnected to guide the movement of the neck linkage assembly to impart the roll motion to the simulated head (see Rodriguez see paragraph 62-63 linkages 415, 425 and 420; Ke FIG 2 neck linkage 10 and paragraph 15 for linkage 10 that interconnected to guide the movement of the neck linkage assembly to impart the roll/pitch motion to the simulated head with the rotational actuator 10; and Zhu linkage FIG. 10 and FIG. 19 and page 11 last paragraph- page 12 first paragraph). However, the combination of Ding and any of the Ke, Zhu, and Rodriguez reference are not warranted since the combination would result in a combination that would render the Ding reference unsatisfactory for its intended purpose, and it would change the principle operation of the Ding reference. If the proposed modification or combination of the prior art would change the principle of operation of the prior art invention being modified, then the teachings of the references are not sufficient to render the claims prima facie obvious. In re Ratti, 270 F.2d 810, 813, 123 USPQ 349, 352 (CCPA 1959).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J UTAMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1676. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 17:30 Monday - Friday.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at (571)270-1344. 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.
/ROBERT J UTAMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights