CTNF 19/071,976 CTNF 84629 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement 06-52 The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/6/2025 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification 06-11 AIA The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim(s) 1 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 2, 6, 10-12 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (US 2025/0010492 A1) and Barral et al. (US 2025/0391553 A1) . For claims 1 and 18-20, Yu discloses a robot system, comprising: a robot arm, a tool being detachably mounted to the robot arm (Fig. 1, 7-9, where the robotic system detachably mount tools); a sensor configured to acquire data related to the tool (Abstract, fig. 3, 7-9, para. 0081); and a control device configured to control the robot arm, the control device being configured to perform at least a first determination of operating the tool after the tool is mounted, and determining whether or not the tool is mounted based on an operation result (Para. 0085, 0086, where the control system determines whether or not the tool is mounted based on detection result), but does not specifically disclose a second determination of determining whether or not the mounted tool matches a prescribed tool by using the data acquired by the sensor, the second determination being performed when the tool is determined to be mounted in the first determination. Barral in the same field of the art discloses a second determination of determining whether or not the mounted tool matches a prescribed tool by using the data acquired by the sensor, the second determination being performed when the tool is determined to be mounted in the first determination (Para. 0079, where the tools connected is determined to match the prescribed tool). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the invention of Yu to determine whether or not the mounted tool matches a prescribed tool by using the data acquired by the sensor, the second determination being performed when the tool is determined to be mounted in the first determination, as taught by Barral to confirm that the tools attached to the robotic arm matches. For claim 2, Yu discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the tool is a gripping tool configured to grip an object, and the robot arm uses the gripping tool to transfer the object (Fig. 15, where the gripping tool grip an object for transfer). For claim 6, Yu, as modified, discloses the system according to claim 2, wherein the sensor detects at least one selected from an angular velocity, an acceleration, and a force applied to the robot arm, the control device calculates a weight of the gripping tool based on the data of the sensor (Fig. 14, para. 0085, where weight of the gripping tool is determined based on sensed data), and in the second determination, the control device determines whether or not the gripping tool matches the prescribed tool by comparing a difference between the calculated weight and a preregistered weight to a threshold (Fig. 14, para. 0085, where the weight of the tool is known and matched by the control to determine the selected tool is connected). For claim 10, Yu, as modified, discloses the system according to claim 2, wherein the control device detaches the mounted tool and mounts another gripping tool to the robot arm when the mounted tool is determined not to match the prescribed tool in the second determination (Barral - Para. 0057, where the current connected tool is incorrect based on data compared and another tool needs to be mounted). For claim 11, Yu, as modified, discloses the system according to claim 2, wherein the control device performs the first and second determinations after the gripping tool is mounted to the robot arm and before the object is gripped by the gripping tool (Barral - Para. 0079, where the tools connected is determined to match the prescribed tool, before the gripping tool grips any objects). For claim 12, Yu, as modified, discloses the system according to claim 2, wherein the control device mounts the gripping tool to a distal end of the robot arm by sliding the distal end laterally toward an end part of the gripping tool (Fig. 3, 7-9) . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 3-5, 7-9, and 13-17 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. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: For claim(s) 3, the prior arts on record do not teach, describe and/or suggest all the limitations as presented in the claim including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as a whole and specifically counts a number of electrical components that are included in the gripping tool and are capable of communicating; determines that the gripping tool is mounted to the robot arm when the counted number is not less than 1; and determines that the gripping tool is not mounted to the robot arm when the counted number is 0. Claim(s) 4 depend(s) on claim 3, requiring all the depended limitations/features would also be allowable. For claim(s) 5, Yu, as modified, teaches the control device uses the data acquired by the sensor to acquire characteristic information including at least a weight of the gripping tool (Fig. 13). However, the prior arts on record do not teach, describe and/or suggest all the limitations as presented in the claim including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as a whole and specifically the control device uses the data acquired by the sensor to acquire characteristic information including at least one selected from the group consisting of a weight of the gripping tool, a length of the gripping tool, and an appearance of the gripping tool, and in the second determination, the control device determines whether or not the gripping tool matches the prescribed tool by comparing the characteristic information and preregistered information. For claim(s) 7, the prior arts on record do not teach, describe and/or suggest all the limitations as presented in the claim including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as a whole and specifically transmits a first signal to one or more motors included in the gripping tool, receives a second signal transmitted from each of the one or more motors, counts a number of the motors from which the second signal is received, and determines whether or not the gripping tool is mounted based on the counted number of the motors. For claim(s) 8, the prior arts on record do not teach, describe and/or suggest all the limitations as presented in the claim including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as a whole and specifically receives a pressure detected by one or more pressure sensors included in the gripping tool; counts a number of the pressure sensors for which a difference between the detected pressure and a preregistered pressure is less than a threshold; and determines whether or not the gripping tool is mounted based on the counted number of the pressure sensors. For claim(s) 9, the prior arts on record do not teach, describe and/or suggest all the limitations as presented in the claim including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as a whole and specifically the sensor detects at least one selected from an angular velocity, an acceleration, and a force applied to the robot arm, and in the second determination, the control device determines whether or not the mounted tool matches the prescribed tool by comparing a preregistered detection result of the prescribed operation and a detection result of the sensor when the robot arm performs a prescribed operation. For claim(s) 13, the prior arts on record do not teach, describe and/or suggest all the limitations as presented in the claim including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as a whole and specifically selecting characteristic information that does not mutually overlap among the characteristic information of the plurality of tools, andin the second determination, acquiring the data from one of the plurality of sensors configured to obtain the selected characteristic information. Claim(s) 14 depend(s) on claim 13, requiring all the depended limitations/features would also be allowable. For claim(s) 15, the prior arts on record do not teach, describe and/or suggest all the limitations as presented in the claim including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as a whole and specifically when the tool is determined not to be mounted in the first determination, the control device re-performs an operation of mounting the tool to the robot arm. Claim(s) 16 depend(s) on claim 15, requiring all the depended limitations/features would also be allowable. For claim(s) 17, the prior arts on record do not teach, describe and/or suggest all the limitations as presented in the claim including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as a whole and specifically when the mounted tool does not match the prescribed tool in the second determination, the control device identifies the mounted tool and corrects information of a placement location of the identified tool . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. (US 2020/0319630 A1) Rudnitsky et al. discloses a robotic system determining the tools mounted. (US 2017/0165803 A1) Nakayama discloses a machine system having tool mounting and interchanging system. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sze-Hon Kong whose telephone number is (571)270-1503. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM-5 PM Mon-Fri. 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, Abby Lin can be reached at (571) 270-3976. 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. /SZE-HON KONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/071,976 Page 2 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/071,976 Page 3 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/071,976 Page 4 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/071,976 Page 5 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/071,976 Page 6 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/071,976 Page 7 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/071,976 Page 8 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/071,976 Page 9 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/071,976 Page 10 Art Unit: 3657
Prosecution Insights