DETAILED ACTION
This is the First Office Action in response to the above identified patent
application filed on March 27, 2025.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tan et al. (USPub 2024/0025671).
Referring to Figure 7, Tan teaches a robot comprising: a base (40); a first arm (10a) that is coupled to the base and rotates around a first rotation axis with respect to the base; a second arm (10b) that is coupled to the first arm at a base end portion and rotates around a second rotation axis parallel to the first rotation axis with respect to the first arm; a first electronic component (11) and a second electronic component (13) that are disposed in the second arm; a relay circuit board (12) disposed in the second arm; a first wiring line that electrically couples the relay circuit board and the first electronic component; a second wiring line that electrically couples the relay circuit board and the second electronic component; and a third wiring line (30) routed to the base and the second arm and electrically coupled to the relay circuit board.
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, 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(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan et al. (USPub 2024/0025671), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamazaki (USPub 2020/0101627).
Tan teaches the robot having a control device (2) connected to the relay circuit board, but does not teach the control device being provided on the base. It was well known in the robot art to provide a control device in a robot base. For example, Yamazaki teaches a robot having articulated arms, electric components disposed the arms, wherein a control device (51.52) is disposed in the robot base (20) and connected to the electric components. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed device to position the control device of Tan et al. on the robot base, as taught by Yamazaki, motivation being to provide a more compact arrangement.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not teach the claim combination of structural components as defined in claim 2, and depending claims 3-6, such as the linear moveable shaft disposed along the third axis, the first component configured as a brake, and the third component configures as a brake release button for releasing the brake.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note the wiring arrangement of Hoshino et al. (USPub 2019/0389077).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM C JOYCE whose telephone number is (571)272-7107. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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 571-270-7778. 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.
/WILLIAM C JOYCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights