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 .
Election/Restrictions
The 4/28/2026 restriction requirement is partially withdrawn due to applicant’s 6/29/2026 amendment to incorporate the limitations of former claim 6 (now canceled by applicant) into claim 1. More particularly the restriction between Subcombination Group I and Combination II is withdrawn. The restriction between Species is maintained and addressed below.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1 (figs.1-5, 11b and 11c), claims 1-4, 8-10, 12-17 and 19-20 in the reply filed on 6/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 5, 7, 11 and 18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
The examiner notes, contrary to applicant’s assertion, that claim 5 recites elements (e.g., water supply 84, silo 82, mixer pump 86) specific to non-elected species 7 (fig.15). See the interview summary mailed 6/9/2026 wherein the examiner and applicant agreed that species 7 is drawn to figure 15 despite the 4/28/2026 restriction containing a typo incorrectly stating otherwise.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-4, 8-10, 12, 14-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Asadi US2021/0308710.
Claim 1. A mobile robotic arm system, comprising: a mobile platform (100), wherein the mobile platform comprises a vehicle body (body of 100) with a drive mechanism (111); a lifting mast (730) mounted to the mobile platform; a generator (140, and/or “a walking power unit provided on the pedestal”, para.0047) on the mobile platform for powering electric and electronic components on the mobile platform (see MPEP 2112.01 and 2114 regarding inherency of functions/properties in product claims and applicant’s burden to obtain/test prior art to prove otherwise); a hydraulic power unit (600) mounted to the mobile platform for providing hydraulic power to the lifting mast (see MPEP 2112.01 and 2114; and/or see para.0057-0058); and a multi-axis robotic arm (300) mounted on the lifting mast and powered by at least one of the generator and the hydraulic power unit.
Claim 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the lifting mast comprises a substantially vertical mast (730) and a support structure (base of 300 translating up/down on 730) moveable along the mast and extending laterally away from the mast, the multi-axis robotic arm being mounted to the support structure (e.g., see fig.4).
Claim 3. The system of claim 1, further comprising a 3D concrete printing nozzle (“3D”, para.0018-0021, 0065, 0074-0077 and 0088-0089; “concrete”, para.0039 and 0092; “nozzle”, para.0059 and 0063) mounted to the multi-axis robotic arm and a 3D concrete printing system (400) connected to the nozzle.
Claim 4. The system of claim 3, wherein the 3D concrete system is mounted to the mobile platform (e.g., see fig.2).
Claim 8. (currently amended) The system of claim 1, wherein the drive mechanism comprises an engine or a motor (“walking motor”, col.0047), and a track system (wheels 111 are a track system within the broadest reasonable interpretation since they can follow a track/path; and/or since they each present a cylindrical outer tread/track on the outer circumference thereof) driven by the engine or the motor.
Claim 9. The system of claim 8, wherein the track system comprises continuous tracks (continuous tracks/treads of wheels 111) defining forward and reverse directions of movement.
Claim 10. The system of claim 9, wherein the multi-axis robotic arm is positioned forward from a center of the mobile platform (see fig.4), whereby a build volume can be further away from the mobile platform, allowing for dynamic adjustment in height and depth relative to the build volume (see MPEP 2112.01 and 2114 regarding inherency of functions/properties in product claims and applicant’s burden to obtain/test the prior art to prove otherwise).
Claim 12. The system of claim 1, further comprising stabilizing supports (portions supporting wheels 111) on the mobile platform.
Claim 14. The system of claim 1, wherein the mast is reinforced (see fig.2).
Claim 15. The system of claim 1, further comprising a control system (700, e.g., para.0068; “computer aided control system”, para 0067; and/or “hand-held terminal” para.0071) configured to communicate with controls on board the mobile platform, the mast and the robotic arm, and configured to move the mobile platform, control the mast, and control a tool implemented on the multi -axis robotic arm (see MPEP 2112.01 and 2114 regarding inherency of functions/properties in product claims and applicant’s burden to obtain/test the prior art to prove otherwise).
Claim 16. The system of claim 15, wherein the control system is remote from the mobile platform, whereby the system is remotely controlled (“hand-held terminal… tablet personal computer, a mobile phone, and the like… wireless…” para.0071).
Claim 17. The system of claim 1, wherein, in a position configured for storage or transportation, the system has a forward facing profile defined by the mobile platform and the mast, and wherein the multi-axis robotic arm can be positioned to be fully within the forward facing profile (see fig.4).
Claim 20. The system of claim 1, further comprising survey tools (cameras, encoder, controller, para.0018) including a robotic surveying tool (camera, para.0018) on the mobile platform for surveying a potential worksite, whereby the system can survey the site as well as track a relative location of the system on site for precise robotic construction using reference points on the system (see MPEP 2112.01 and 2114 regarding inherency of functions/properties in product claims and applicant’s burden to obtain/test the prior art to prove otherwise).
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 of this title, 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 8, 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asadi US2021/0308710 in view of Pearson US20210189747.
Claims 8 and 9. As detailed elsewhere above, the outer treads of wheels 111 of Asadi are tracks within the broadest reasonable interpretation. In the interest of compact prosecution, the examiner notes that if applicant were to amend the claims to require --crawler tracks driven by the wheels--, such would have been an obvious modification of Asadi, since Pearson teaches such crawler tracks (44) to have been known to be desirable, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have easily recognized the Pearson crawler tracks to be desirable/obvious for the purpose of better performance on uneven ground than wheels alone.
Claim 13. Asadi does not disclose folding outriggers. Pearson teaches that it was known to be desirable “to give more stability” (para.0236) by providing folding outriggers (46) mounted to the mobile platform (40) and movable between a deployed position (e.g., fig.1) wherein the mobile platform is stabilized on a surface, and a withdrawn position (e.g., fig.7) wherein they are within an overall outer profile defined by the mobile platform. 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 Asadi to have outriggers as such.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asadi US2021/0308710 in view of Giles US20180071949.
Claim 19. Asadi does not expressly state how high the robot is lifted. Giles teaches the utility of high heights (20 feet, 40 feet) to have been known to be desirable (Giles, para. 0101, 0103). 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 Asadi such that the lifting mast is configured to lift the robot to a height above the mobile platform of at least 20 feet for the purpose of increasing utility to allow usage at higher heights.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on the attached PTO-892 and not relied upon above is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure due general structural similarity thereto.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR L MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7085.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/VICTOR L MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights