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 .
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This is the first Office Action on the merits of Application 19/045,871 filed on 2/5/25. Claims 1-14 are pending. Claims 15-20 has been cancelled due to a restriction requirement.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I and Species A, in the reply filed on 12/3/25 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/12/25 (2), 4/9/25, 7/7/25 (2) is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement filed 10/8/25 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Note: The “Electromechanical design for an electrically powered, actively balanced one leg planar robot” is missing.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 13 & 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent 9,752,653 to Yao.
Claim 1
Yao discloses in Figs 1-10,
A gear assembly comprising: a first support (e.g. 3) extending circumferentially around an assembly axis in a first plane intersecting the assembly axis; a second support (e.g. 4) extending circumferentially around the assembly axis in a second plane intersecting the assembly axis, wherein the first and second planes are spaced apart from one another along the assembly axis (see Fig 3 & 4); a first transfer member (e.g. A) including first lobes and first troughs circumferentially alternating in a third plane intersecting the assembly axis; a second transfer member (e.g. B) including second lobes and second troughs circumferentially alternating in a fourth plane intersecting the assembly axis, wherein the third and fourth planes are between the first and second planes along the assembly axis; and pins (e.g. 531) individually extending between the first and second supports along respective pin axes, wherein the individual pins are configured to rotate about the respective pin axes relative to the first and second supports in response to force from at least one of the first and second transfer members during operation of the gear assembly as the first and second transfer members move out-of-phase with one another relative to the assembly axis.
Claim 2
The gear assembly of claim 1, wherein: the gear assembly further comprises: first roller bearings (e.g. 6) at the first support, and second roller bearings (e.g. 7) at the second support; and the pins individually extend between different respective pairs of one of the first roller bearings and one of the second roller bearings.
Claim 3
The gear assembly of claim 2, wherein: the first support includes first sockets (e.g. 32) circumferentially distributed around the assembly axis; the first roller bearings are at least partially disposed within the first sockets; the second support includes second sockets (e.g. 42) circumferentially distributed around the assembly axis; and the second roller bearings are at least partially disposed within the second sockets.
Claim 4
The gear assembly of claim 3, wherein: the first support includes a first plate defining first through holes; the first sockets are at the first through holes; the second support includes a second plate defining second through holes; and the second sockets are at the second through holes (see Fig 3, each support has a base plate attached, which shows thickness in supports).
Claim 6
The gear assembly of claim 2, wherein: the first and second roller bearings individually include: rollers (e.g. 523) individually defining a cylindrical outer surface, an annular frame (e.g. 522) carrying the rollers; and the individual pins are configured to contact the cylindrical outer surfaces of the corresponding rollers directly.
Claim 13
The gear assembly of claim 1, further comprising threaded fasteners (e.g. 20 & 43) individually extending between and in contact with the first and second supports.
Claim 14
The gear assembly of claim 1, wherein: the first lobes and first troughs form a first continuous cycloidal profile through which the first transfer member contacts at least some of the pins; and the second lobes and second troughs form a second continuous cycloidal profile through which the second transfer member contacts at least some of the pins (see profile and shapes in Fig 6).
Claims 1, 2 & 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent 11,168,763 to Chung et al.
Claim 1
Chung discloses in Figs 1-6b,
A gear assembly comprising: a first support (e.g. 50) extending circumferentially around an assembly axis in a first plane intersecting the assembly axis; a second support (e.g. 61) extending circumferentially around the assembly axis in a second plane intersecting the assembly axis, wherein the first and second planes are spaced apart from one another along the assembly axis (see Fig 2a-2d); a first transfer member (e.g. 51) including first lobes and first troughs (e.g. see 511) circumferentially alternating in a third plane intersecting the assembly axis; a second transfer member (e.g. 60) including second lobes and second troughs (e.g. see 601) circumferentially alternating in a fourth plane intersecting the assembly axis, wherein the third and fourth planes are between the first and second planes along the assembly axis; and pins (e.g. 52) individually extending between the first and second supports along respective pin axes, wherein the individual pins are configured to rotate about the respective pin axes relative to the first and second supports in response to force from at least one of the first and second transfer members during operation of the gear assembly as the first and second transfer members move out-of-phase with one another relative to the assembly axis.
Claim 2
The gear assembly of claim 1, wherein: the gear assembly further comprises: first roller bearings (e.g. 80a) at the first support, and second roller bearings (e.g. 80a) at the second support; and the pins individually extend between different respective pairs of one of the first roller bearings and one of the second roller bearings (see Fig 2d).
Claim 11
The gear assembly of claim 1, further comprising: an input shaft (e.g. 2) configured to rotate about the assembly axis; and a first eccentric bearing (e.g. 80a) carried by the input shaft, wherein the first transfer member defines a first central opening (e.g. 513) at which the first eccentric bearing is rotatably disposed; and a second eccentric bearing (e.g. 80a) carried by the input shaft, wherein the second transfer member defines a second central opening (e.g. 603) at which the second eccentric bearing is rotatably disposed.
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 9,752,653 to Yao in view of U.S. Patent 4,373,760 to Durham.
Claim 5
Yao discloses in a gear assembly with a first support, a second support, a first transfer member with lobes and troughs, a second transfer member with lobes and troughs and pins extending between the two supports with roller bearings thereon. Yao however, does not explicitly disclose that the bearings are drawn-cup needle roller bearings. Durham teaches, drawn-cup needle roller bearings (e.g. 17). Therefore it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the claims were effectively filed to substitute the bearings of Yao with those of Durham to achieve the predictable result of reducing rotational resistance between the pins and their supports.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 9,752,653 to Yao.
Claim 12
Yao discloses in a gear assembly with a first support, a second support, a first transfer member with lobes and troughs, a second transfer member with lobes and troughs and pins extending between the two supports with roller bearings thereon. Yao however, does not explicitly disclose that an input-to-output reduction ratio is within the a range from 20:1 to 40:1. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the claims was effectively filed to select the ratio of the input-to-output to be within a range from 20:1 to 40:1, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2D 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Further it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 11,168,763 to Chung et al.
Claim 12
Chung discloses in a gear assembly with a first support, a second support, a first transfer member with lobes and troughs, a second transfer member with lobes and troughs and pins extending between the two supports with roller bearings thereon. Chung however, does not explicitly disclose that an input-to-output reduction ratio is within the a range from 20:1 to 40:1. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the claims was effectively filed to select the ratio of the input-to-output to be within a range from 20:1 to 40:1, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2D 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Further it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-5 & 11 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4-7 & 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,398,785. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the patent full encompass those of the instant application.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gu ‘764 teaches a planetary gearbox and robot joint, but lacks a multiple portion pin and a carrier with rods that penetrate all of the transfer members.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUAN LE whose telephone number is (571)270-3122. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm PST.
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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached on 571-270-5565. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HUAN LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655