DETAILED ACTION
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 8 and 14 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.
Claim 8 recites “the other resin member”, which lacks antecedent basis in the claim.
Claim 14 recites “the first member”, which lacks antecedent basis in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 1-2, 5-6, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (DE 20015922).
Regarding the claims, the prior art discloses the following:
1. (Currently Amended) A power transmission device incorporated into a robot that grips a cleaning target object or a cleaning member and that performs a process of cleaning the cleaning target object (intended use), the power transmission device comprising: food-grade grease (9) that is applied to seal a gap portion (8), the gap portion (8) being provided between an internal space (i.e., internal to 8) and an external space (i.e., external to 8) of the power transmission device, wherein the internal space is internal to the power transmission device and enclosed with a lubricant (i.e., disclosed roller bearings are filled with lubricating grease), and the external space is external to the power transmission device.
2. (Currently Amended) The power transmission device according to claim 1, wherein the lubricant enclosed in the internal space (i.e., lubricating grease) is different from the food-grade grease (i.e., food-grade grease) applied to seal the gap portion.
5. (Currently Amended) The power transmission device according to claim 1, further comprising: a first member (5) and a second member (6), wherein the gap portion (8) includes a first gap portion (fig. 2) formed by gap forming members (e.g., any of 7 and/or 7a) and a second gap portion (8) formed between the first member (5) and the second member (6), and the second gap portion has a relative rotation speed between the first member and the second member that is higher than a relative rotation speed between the gap forming members in the first gap portion (i.e., speed of rotating portion is function of radial distance).
6. (Currently Amended) The power transmission device according to claim 5, wherein the first gap portion is disposed radially outward of the second gap portion (fig. 2).
11. (New) The power transmission device according to claim 1, further comprising: a first member (5) and a second member (6), wherein the gap portion (8) is formed between the first member and the second member.
14. (New) The power transmission device according to claim 1, wherein the first member (as best understood, 4) is an input shaft in which rotation is input to the power transmission device.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 3-6, 9-10, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (DE 20015922) and (WO 8800515).
The combination is summarized as follows:
The prior art of WO discloses the general structure of a robot with a sealing designed to prevent the leakage of dust, lubricants and greases used in the internal operating mechanism, where the robot includes motor drives and harmonic gearing, and where the sealing design makes use of both sealing members (e.g., 32, 36, 50, 52) and labyrinths (e.g., 54), but is largely silent regarding the explicit structure of the sealing members, and therefore cannot be said to disclose food-grade grease that is applied as a seal.
DE teaches the use of a food-grade grease (9) partially filling cavities (8) between sealing lips (7), which provides the expected advantage of a maintenance-free sealing element. It would have been obvious to use the sealing structure as taught by WO in place of the sealing members of WO, for the expected advantage of reducing maintenance.
The limitations of claims 3-6, 9, and 15 flow naturally from the explanations of the prior art above.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art does not explicitly disclose the materials of the robot components, and therefore cannot be said to read on the limitations of claim 10. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of effective filing to form the component (i.e., the output member, a component) out of the claimed resins for the predictable result of optimizing the structural integrity of the components while minimizing spacing and costs, since it has been held to be well-within the general skill of a worker in the art to select from known materials on the basis of their suitability for the intended use.1
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (DE 20015922).
Regarding claims 7-8, the prior art discloses the power transmission device according to claim 1, as explained above, further comprising: an output member (i.e., either of 2 or 4) that outputs rotation to an outside of the power transmission device, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the output member of the power transmission device is made of an alkali- resistant resin; wherein the output member of the power transmission device is made of a resin with higher alkali resistance than alkali resistance of the other resin member of the power transmission device. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of effective filing to form the component (i.e., the output member, the other member) out of the claimed resins for the predictable result of optimizing the structural integrity of the components while minimizing spacing and costs, since it has been held to be well-within the general skill of a worker in the art to select from known materials on the basis of their suitability for the intended use.2
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-13 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
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 T. S. FIX whose telephone number is (571)272-8535. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10a-3p.
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 5712707778. 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.
/T. SCOTT FIX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
1 See discussions of MPEP 2144.07 regarding Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) and In reLeshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
2 See discussions of MPEP 2144.07 regarding Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) and In reLeshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Prosecution Insights