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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” “… is disclosed…,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Objections
Claim 54 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 54 is assumed to depend on Claim 48 instead of Claim 41 since Claim 44 already depends on Claim 41 with the claimed barbs. 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.
Claim 60 is 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 60 recites the limitation "the second plurality of ridges" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There are no ridges claimed in Claim 55; Claim 60 depends on Claim 55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 41-43, 45-53, and 55-59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bourgeaux (FR 2 617 078) in view of Nagasawa et al. (US 7726715) (“Nagasawa”). Bourgeaux discloses:
PNG
media_image1.png
344
454
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
343
446
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
402
504
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 41: a body (2) including a first planar contact surface (on 2a/3) and a second planar contact surface (on 2b/4), the first planar contact surface and the second planar contact surface providing an orthogonal relationship and conforming to a corner of an object with a right angle relationship between a top of the object and a side of the object (Fig. 1);
the body coupled (via 1) to the programmable motion device with a high flow vacuum supply
the first planar contact surface including a vacuum opening coupled to the vacuum supply (3);
(portion of) second plurality of ridges (2a/2b portions are capable of having some of the second plurality of ridges)
Claim 47: wherein the body is rotatably coupled to the programmable motion device (“In this drawing, reference 1 designates the free end of the mobile arm of a manipulator, said end 1 being intended to be equipped with the gripping device according to the invention.” (English translation); this includes rotating the body);
Claim 55: a body (2) coupled to a distal end of the programmable motion device (via 1);
the body including a first planar contact surface (on 2a/3) and a second planar contact surface (on 2b/4), the first planar contact surface and the second planar contact surface providing an orthogonal relationship (Fig. 1) and conforming to a corner of an object with a right angle relationship between a top of the object and a side of the object (Fig. 1; C on 2a/2b/3/4);
a high flow vacuum supply providing
the end-effector, when presented to grasp a cuboid object comprising a hinged lid (side of C; alternatively, intended use), lifts the object from the hinged lid using the high flow vacuum supply while the second planar contact surface constrains the cuboid object from rotation to prevent the hinged lid from opening (hinge for opening of the package/cuboid object; “While this system is perfectly suited for handling rigid and resistant loads, it is no longer the same when dealing with more or less heavy loads contained inside cardboard boxes whose upper part is most often arranged to allow the opening of the package or similar. Experience shows that this upper part, fragile and deformable, is frequently damaged and torn during lifting operations.” (English translation of p. 1, lines 15-21));
Claim 48: a body (2) including a first planar contact surface (on 2a/3) and a second planar contact surface (on 2b/4), the first planar contact surface and the second planar contact surface providing an orthogonal relationship and conforming to a corner of an object with a right angle relationship (Fig. 1) between a top of the object and a side of the object (Fig. 1; C on 2a/2b/3/4);
the body coupled to the programmable motion device with a vacuum supply provided therein (via 1);
the first planar contact surface including a vacuum opening coupled to the vacuum supply (3).
Bourgeaux does not directly show:
Claim 41: a high flow vacuum supply with a flowrate of at least 100 cubic feet per minute;
the first planar contact surface including a first plurality of ridges, the first plurality of ridges providing vacuum flow to the vacuum supply in a first direction and vacuum flow in a second direction, the first direction being orthogonal to the second direction;
the second planar contact surface including a second plurality of ridges;
Claim 42: wherein the second plurality of ridges on the second planar contact surface have a non-slip surface;
Claim 43: wherein the non-slip surface is formed from at least one of rubber, cork, adhesive, and electro-static material;
Claim 45: wherein the first planar contact surface further comprises a compliant seal encircling the first plurality of ridges;
Claim 46: wherein the compliant seal is at least as high as the ridges;
Claim 48: the first planar contact surface including a first plurality of ridges, the plurality of ridges providing open vacuum flow to the vacuum supply in a first direction and vacuum flow in a second direction, the first direction being orthogonal to the second direction;
the first plurality of ridges encircled by a compliant seal; and
the second planar contact surface including a second plurality of ridges;
Claim 49: wherein the compliant seal has a height that is at least as high as a height of the first plurality of ridges;
Claim 50: wherein the vacuum supply is provided by a blower with a pressure of no more than about 25,000 Pascals below atmospheric pressure and at least about 100 cubic feet per minute;
Claim 51: wherein the vacuum supply is provided with a flow rate between 130 and 140 cubic feet per minute;
Claim 52: wherein the second plurality of ridges on the second planar contact surface have a non-slip surface;
Claim 53: wherein the non-slip surface is formed from at least one of rubber, cork, adhesive, and electro-static material;
Claim 55: a high flow vacuum supply providing at least 100 cubic feet per minute vacuum flow;
Claim 56: wherein the first planar contact surface has a plurality of ridge features to distribute vacuum to the first contact surface;
Claim 57: wherein the first planar contact surface further comprises a compliant seal surrounding the plurality of ridge features;
Claim 58: wherein the second planar contact surface comprises a plurality of ridges including a non-slip surface;
Claim 59: wherein the non-slip surface is formed from at least one of rubber, cork, adhesive, and electro-static material.
Re. Claim 41, Bourgeaux teaches providing vacuum at 3 and 4 for the purpose of providing a vacuum gripper that decreases the likelihood of damaging the box due to more delicate gripping than at least gripping fingers (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bourgeaux such that a high flow vacuum supply with a flowrate of at least 100 cubic feet per minute, for providing a vacuum gripper that decreases the likelihood of damaging the box due to more delicate gripping than at least gripping fingers. As discussed in MPEP 2144.05 (citing In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (CCPA 1955)), where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. According to the original specification, there is no criticality to the claimed pressure ranges.
Re. Claims 50-51, Bourgeaux teaches providing vacuum at 3 and 4 for the purpose of providing a vacuum gripper that decreases the likelihood of damaging the box due to more delicate gripping than at least gripping fingers (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bourgeaux such that the vacuum supply is provided by a blower with a pressure of no more than about 25,000 Pascals below atmospheric pressure and at least about 100 cubic feet per minute and that the vacuum supply is provided with a flow rate between 130 and 140 cubic feet per minute, for providing a vacuum gripper that decreases the likelihood of damaging the box due to more delicate gripping than at least gripping fingers. As discussed in MPEP 2144.05 (citing In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (CCPA 1955)), where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. According to the original specification, there is no criticality to the claimed pressure ranges.
Re. Claim 55, Bourgeaux teaches providing vacuum at 3 and 4 for the purpose of providing a vacuum gripper that decreases the likelihood of damaging the box due to more delicate gripping than at least gripping fingers (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bourgeaux such that a high flow vacuum supply providing at least 100 cubic feet per minute vacuum flow, for providing a vacuum gripper that decreases the likelihood of damaging the box due to more delicate gripping than at least gripping fingers. As discussed in MPEP 2144.05 (citing In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (CCPA 1955)), where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. According to the original specification, there is no criticality to the claimed pressure ranges.
Nagasawa shows a similar device having:
Claim 41: the first planar contact surface including a first plurality of ridges (ridges that form 50d on the right (at label in FIG. 19) at inner 50e), the first plurality of ridges providing vacuum flow to the vacuum supply in a first direction and vacuum flow in a second direction (flow from ridges that form 50d below 50b at inner 50e), the first direction being orthogonal to the second direction (ridges that form 50d below 50b at inner 50e);
the second planar contact surface including a second plurality of ridges (ridges that form 50d below 50b at inner 50e);
Claim 42: wherein the second plurality of ridges on the second planar contact surface (ridges that form 50d on the right (at label in FIG. 19) at inner 50e) have a non-slip surface (no slip in Fig. 2 of Bourgeaux; no slip in Nagasawa);
Claim 43: wherein the non-slip surface is formed from at least one of rubber, cork, adhesive, and electro-static material (rubber);
Claim 45: wherein the first planar contact surface further comprises a compliant seal encircling the first plurality of ridges (50a);
Claim 46: wherein the compliant seal is at least as high as the ridges (50a provides an “airtight” (para. [0068]) seal, therefore it is at least as high as the ridges);
Claim 48: the first planar contact surface including a first plurality of ridges (ridges that form 50d on the right (at label in FIG. 19) at inner 50e), the plurality of ridges providing open vacuum flow to the vacuum supply in a first direction and vacuum flow in a second direction (flow from ridges that form 50d on the right (at label in FIG. 19) at inner 50e), the first direction being orthogonal to the second direction (Fig. 1);
the first plurality of ridges encircled by a compliant seal (50a);
the second planar contact surface including a second plurality of ridges (ridges that form 50d below 50b at inner 50e);
Claim 49: wherein the compliant seal has a height that is at least as high as a height of the first plurality of ridges (50a provides an “airtight” (para. [0068]) seal, therefore it is at least as high as the ridges);
Claim 52: wherein the second plurality of ridges on the second planar contact surface have a non-slip surface (no slip in Fig. 2 of Bourgeaux; no slip in Nagasawa);
Claim 53: wherein the non-slip surface is formed from at least one of rubber, cork, adhesive, and electro-static material (rubber);
Claim 56: wherein the first planar contact surface has a plurality of ridge features (ridges that form 50d on the right (at label in FIG. 19) at inner 50e) to distribute vacuum to the first contact surface (ridges that form 50d on the right (at label in FIG. 19) at inner 50e);
Claim 57: wherein the first planar contact surface further comprises a compliant seal (50a) surrounding the plurality of ridge features;
Claim 58: wherein the second planar contact surface (ridges that form 50d on the right (at label in FIG. 19) at inner 50e) comprises a plurality of ridges including a non-slip surface (no slip in Fig. 2 of Bourgeaux; no slip in Nagasawa);
Claim 59: wherein the non-slip surface is formed from at least one of rubber, cork, adhesive, and electro-static material (rubber);
PNG
media_image4.png
941
771
media_image4.png
Greyscale
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the suction force of the apparatus (column 11, lines 28-32). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bourgeaux as taught by Nagasawa and include Nagasawa’s similar device having:
Claim 41: the first planar contact surface including a first plurality of ridges, the first plurality of ridges providing vacuum flow to the vacuum supply in a first direction and vacuum flow in a second direction, the first direction being orthogonal to the second direction;
the second planar contact surface including a second plurality of ridges;
Claim 42: wherein the second plurality of ridges on the second planar contact surface have a non-slip surface;
Claim 43: wherein the non-slip surface is formed from at least one of rubber, cork, adhesive, and electro-static material;
Claim 45: wherein the first planar contact surface further comprises a compliant seal encircling the first plurality of ridges;
Claim 46: wherein the compliant seal is at least as high as the ridges;
Claim 48: the first planar contact surface including a first plurality of ridges, the plurality of ridges providing open vacuum flow to the vacuum supply in a first direction and vacuum flow in a second direction, the first direction being orthogonal to the second direction;
the first plurality of ridges encircled by a compliant seal; and
the second planar contact surface including a second plurality of ridges;
Claim 49: wherein the compliant seal has a height that is at least as high as a height of the first plurality of ridges;
Claim 52: wherein the second plurality of ridges on the second planar contact surface have a non-slip surface;
Claim 53: wherein the non-slip surface is formed from at least one of rubber, cork, adhesive, and electro-static material;
Claim 56: wherein the first planar contact surface has a plurality of ridge features to distribute vacuum to the first contact surface;
Claim 57: wherein the first planar contact surface further comprises a compliant seal surrounding the plurality of ridge features;
Claim 58: wherein the second planar contact surface comprises a plurality of ridges including a non-slip surface;
Claim 59: wherein the non-slip surface is formed from at least one of rubber, cork, adhesive, and electro-static material;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the suction force of the apparatus.
Claims 44, 54, and 60 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bourgeaux in view of Nagasawa and Luo (CN109531554A). Bourgeaux discloses all the limitations of the claims as discussed above. Bourgeaux does not directly show:
Claims 44, 54, and 60: wherein the second plurality of ridges on the second planar contact surface includes barbs.
Luo shows a similar device having:
Claims 44, 54, and 60: wherein the second plurality of ridges on the second planar contact surface includes barbs (“Preferably, the side of the clamping plates adjacent to each other is uniformly provided with anti-slip barbs.”; “In the present embodiment, the side of the holding plate 20 adjacent to each other is evenly provided with anti-slip barbs, which improves the friction between the clamping plate 20 and the outer side wall of the product, thereby improving the stability of the clamping and avoiding the translocation or slipping of the goods.” (English translation));
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of improving the gripping stability and avoiding the translocation or slipping of the object (see English translation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bourgeaux as taught by Luo and include Luo’s similar device having:
Claims 44, 54, and 60: wherein the second plurality of ridges on the second planar contact surface includes barbs;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of improving the gripping stability and avoiding the translocation or slipping of the object.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 9061868 discloses first/second planar contact surfaces in Figure 2.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gerald McClain whose telephone number is (571)272-7803. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and at gerald.mcclain@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03 (II)).
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272-7097. 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.
/Gerald McClain/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
