DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A in the reply filed on 07/28/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that a search for the subject matter of any one species would encompass search for the subject matter of the remaining species. This is not found persuasive because:
Examination burden is not limited only to search but rather includes numerous other activities conducted throughout prosecution such as careful consideration of amended claim scope, careful consideration of all arguments, reconsideration of all art in view of arguments/amendments (to include the U.S. Patents in all relevant classes, all relevant foreign art, all relevant publications and any relevant Non-patent literature), updating prior searches, formulating responses, constructing formal written replies, etc. The burden of which multiplies as a function of the number of patentably distinct species under examination.
The mutually exclusive features require time and resources far in excess of that available for the processing of a single application. Note that a proper search in accordance with principles of compact prosecution includes not only the claimed features but also those features that could reasonably be expected to be amended into the claims later in prosecution (e.g., the features shown in the figures or described in the written description). Accordingly, the numerous species cannot be examined in a single application without express admission that the species are "obvious variants" of one another.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 03/27/2025. Claims 1-11 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Claims 9-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 07/28/2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 03/27/2025 was filed and is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Information Disclosure Statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 line 15 reads “on the one side”, --on one side-- is suggested.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Igarashi (US 20170008170 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Igarashi discloses a robot (see Fig. 1; 10) comprising: a base (11); a first arm (12) that is joined to the base and that rotates around a first rotation axis (C1) with respect to the base; a second arm (15) that is joined to the first arm and that rotates around a second rotation axis (C2), which is parallel to the first rotation axis, with respect to the first arm; and an inertia sensor module (30) that is disposed at the second arm, wherein the second arm has an arm base (see Fig. 2; 15a) that is joined to the first arm, a plurality of pillars (31) that are erected from the arm base toward one side (upper side in the figure) in a direction along the second rotation axis, and a mounting member (mounting member connecting 30 to 31) that is fixed to the plurality of pillars, and the inertia sensor module is fixed to the mounting member (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 2, Igarashi discloses a work head (see Fig. 1; 25) that includes a spline shaft (19) which is disposed at the second arm (15) and which is disposed along a third rotation axis (C3), which is parallel to the first rotation axis and a spline nut (19S) and a ball screw nut (19B) which are mounted on the spline shaft, and in which the spline shaft at least rotates around the third rotation axis when the spline nut is rotated (see paragraph [0026], wherein the up/down rotating shaft 19 is positively and negatively rotated around the own shaft center C3 along a vertical direction in accordance with the spline nut 19S), and the spline shaft linearly moves along the third rotation axis when the ball screw nut is rotated (see paragraph [0027], wherein the up/down rotating shaft 19 performs lifting and lowering movements in vertical directions in accordance with the ball screw nut 19B); a spline shaft first drive mechanism (see Fig. 2; 20, 21, pulley of 19S) that includes a first motor (20), a first power transmission mechanism (21, pulley of 19S) which transmits rotation of the first motor to the spline nut, and in which the first power transmission mechanism includes a first pulley (pulley of 19S) which is fixed to the spline nut and a first belt (21) which is wound around the first pulley; and a spline shaft second drive mechanism (23, 24, pulley of 19B) that includes a second motor (23) and a second power transmission mechanism (24, pulley of 19B) which transmits rotation of the second motor to the ball screw nut, and in which the second power transmission mechanism includes a second pulley (pulley of 19B) which is fixed to the ball screw nut and a second belt (24) which is wound around the second pulley, wherein the mounting member (mounting member connecting 30 to 31) is positioned on the one side of the first belt and the second belt in the direction along the second rotation axis and overlaps the first belt and the second belt in plan view from the direction along the second rotation axis (see Fig. 2; see paragraph [0030], wherein the angular velocity sensor 30 supported by the supporting legs 31 is always disposed above the belts 21, 24).
Regarding claim 6, Igarashi discloses in plan view from the direction along the second rotation axis (C2), a fixing place between the inertia sensor module (30) and the mounting member (mounting member connecting 30 to 31) is displaced with respect to a fixing place between the mounting member (mounting member connecting 30 to 31) and each of the pillars (31).
Regarding claim 11, Igarashi discloses a robot system (see Fig. 1) comprising: a robot (10); and a control device (40) that controls driving of the robot, wherein the robot includes a base (11), a first arm (12) that is joined to the base and that rotates around a first rotation axis (C1) with respect to the base, a second arm (15) that is joined to the first arm and that rotates around a second rotation axis (C2), which is parallel to the first rotation axis, with respect to the first arm, and an inertia sensor module (30) that is disposed at the second arm, the second arm has an arm base (see Fig. 2; 15a) that is joined to the first arm, a plurality of pillars (31) that are erected from the arm base toward one side (upper side in the figure) in a direction along the second rotation axis, and a mounting member (mounting member connecting 30 to 31) that is fixed to the plurality of pillars, and the inertia sensor module is fixed to the mounting member (see Fig. 2).
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 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Igarashi (US 20170008170 A1) in view of Sugihara (US 20100089155 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Igarashi fails to disclose the inertia sensor module has a substrate and an inertia sensor that is disposed at the substrate, and the substrate is a rectangle in plan view and is fixed to the mounting member at each corner portion. However, Sugihara teaches the inertia sensor module (see Fig. 2-3; 10) has a substrate (23) and an inertia sensor (24) that is disposed at the substrate, and the substrate is a rectangle in plan view (see Fig. 3) and is fixed to the mounting member (22) at each corner portion (see Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Igarashi with the inertia sensor module as taught by Sugihara, to be held upright relative to the reference base to accurately position the acceleration sensors with respect to the orientation of the robot (see paragraph [0010]; to suppress the influence of external vibrations (see paragraph [0012]); and to accurately fix the acceleration sensors at appropriate positions so that the accuracy is mechanically ensured (see paragraph [0013]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of claim 3 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: the inertia sensor module (Sugihara; 10) has, on the substrate (Sugihara; 23), a connector (Igarashi; connector between 30 and 36) that is disposed between a pair of fixing places (Sugihara; places where 22 is provided) adjacent to each other with the mounting member (Sugihara; 22).
Regarding claim 5, Igarashi fails to disclose the inertia sensor module is fixed to the mounting member via a spacer. However, Sugihara teaches the inertia sensor module (10) is fixed to the mounting member (22) via a spacer (20). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Igarashi with spacers, as taught by Sugihara, to serve as vibration-proofing elastic members (see paragraph [0026]).
Claim 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Igarashi (US 20170008170 A1) in view of Sugimoto (US 20220241959 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Igarashi fails to disclose a through-hole. However, Sugimoto teaches a through-hole (see Fig. 1; 20). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Igarashi with through-holes, as taught by Sugimoto, to provide weight reduction to the robot elements and to allow for routing of pipes (see paragraph [0041]). In other words, providing through-holes in the parts of a robot reduces the weight of the robot, which reduces production costs and energy required to move the robot. Additionally, providing through-holes allows for the routing of pipes and/or cables through the robot elements which prevents snagging of the pipes and/or cables during the operation of the robot. The combination above would necessarily result in the following limitations: a mounting member through-hole (Sugimoto; 20) that penetrates the mounting member in the direction along the second rotation axis (Igarashi; C2).
Regarding claim 8, Igarashi fails to disclose a through-hole. However, Sugimoto teaches a through-hole (see Fig. 1; 20). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Igarashi with through-holes, as taught by Sugimoto, to provide weight reduction to the robot elements and to allow for routing of pipes (see paragraph [0041]). In other words, providing through-holes in the parts of a robot reduces the weight of the robot, which reduces production costs and energy required to move the robot. Additionally, providing through-holes allows for the routing of pipes and/or cables through the robot elements which prevents snagging of the pipes and/or cables during the operation of the robot. The combination above would necessarily result in the following limitations: an arm base (Igarashi; 15a) through-hole (Sugimoto; 20) that penetrates the arm base in the direction along the second rotation axis (Igarashi; C2), wherein the arm base through-hole is positioned between two pillars selected from the plurality of pillars (Igarashi; 31).
Claim 1-6 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Igarashi (US 20170008170 A1) in view of Sugihara (US 20100089155 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Igarashi discloses a robot (see Fig. 1; 10) comprising: a base (11); a first arm (12) that is joined to the base and that rotates around a first rotation axis (C1) with respect to the base; a second arm (15) that is joined to the first arm and that rotates around a second rotation axis (C2), which is parallel to the first rotation axis, with respect to the first arm; and an inertia sensor module (30) that is disposed at the second arm, wherein the second arm has an arm base (see Fig. 2; 15a) that is joined to the first arm, a plurality of pillars (31) that are erected from the arm base toward one side (upper side in the figure) in a direction along the second rotation axis (see Fig. 2). Igarashi fails to disclose a mounting member and the inertia sensor module is fixed to the mounting member. However, Sugihara teaches a mounting member (see Fig. 1-3; 12) and the inertia sensor module (23, 24) is fixed to the mounting member (via 22). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Igarashi with an inertia sensor module fixed to a mounting member, as taught by Sugihara, to be held upright relative to the reference base to accurately position the acceleration sensors with respect to the orientation of the robot (see paragraph [0010]; to suppress the influence of external vibrations (see paragraph [0012]); and to accurately fix the acceleration sensors at appropriate positions so that the accuracy is mechanically ensured (see paragraph [0013]). The combination above is achieved by replacing the angular velocity sensor 30 of Igarashi with the sensor unit 10 of Sugihara. This combination would necessarily result in the following limitations: the mounting member (Sugihara; 12) is fixed to the plurality of pillars (Igarashi; 31).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: a work head (Igarashi; Fig. 1; 25) that includes a spline shaft (Igarashi; 19) which is disposed at the second arm (Igarashi; 15) and which is disposed along a third rotation axis (Igarashi; C3), which is parallel to the first rotation axis and a spline nut (Igarashi; 19S) and a ball screw nut (Igarashi; 19B) which are mounted on the spline shaft, and in which the spline shaft at least rotates around the third rotation axis when the spline nut is rotated (Igarashi; see paragraph [0026], wherein the up/down rotating shaft 19 is positively and negatively rotated around the own shaft center C3 along a vertical direction in accordance with the spline nut 19S), and the spline shaft linearly moves along the third rotation axis when the ball screw nut is rotated (Igarashi; see paragraph [0027], wherein the up/down rotating shaft 19 performs lifting and lowering movements in vertical directions in accordance with the ball screw nut 19B); a spline shaft first drive mechanism (Igarashi; Fig. 2; 20, 21, pulley of 19S) that includes a first motor (Igarashi; 20), a first power transmission mechanism (Igarashi; 21, pulley of 19S) which transmits rotation of the first motor to the spline nut, and in which the first power transmission mechanism includes a first pulley (Igarashi; pulley of 19S) which is fixed to the spline nut and a first belt (Igarashi; 21) which is wound around the first pulley; and a spline shaft second drive mechanism (Igarashi; 23, 24, pulley of 19B) that includes a second motor (Igarashi; 23) and a second power transmission mechanism (Igarashi; 24, pulley of 19B) which transmits rotation of the second motor to the ball screw nut, and in which the second power transmission mechanism includes a second pulley (Igarashi; pulley of 19B) which is fixed to the ball screw nut and a second belt (24) which is wound around the second pulley, wherein the mounting member (Sugihara; 12) is positioned on the one side of the first belt and the second belt in the direction along the second rotation axis and overlaps the first belt and the second belt in plan view from the direction along the second rotation axis (Igarashi; see Fig. 2; see paragraph [0030], wherein the angular velocity sensor 30 supported by the supporting legs 31 is always disposed above the belts 21, 24).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: the inertia sensor module (Sugihara; 23, 24) has a substrate (Sugihara; 23) and an inertia sensor (Sugihara; 24) that is disposed at the substrate, and the substrate is a rectangle in plan view and is fixed to the mounting member (Sugihara; 12) at each corner portion (Sugihara; Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: the inertia sensor module (Sugihara; 23, 24) has, on the substrate (Sugihara; 23), a connector (Igarashi; Fig. 2; connector between 30 and 36) that is disposed between a pair of fixing places adjacent to each other with the mounting member (Sugihara; fixing places where 22 are provided).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: the inertia sensor module (Sugihara; 23, 24) is fixed to the mounting member (Sugihara; 12) via a spacer (Sugihara; 20).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: in plan view from the direction along the second rotation axis (Igarashi; C2), a fixing place (Sugihara; fixing place where 22 is provided) between the inertia sensor module (Sugihara; 23, 24) and the mounting member (Sugihara; 12) is displaced with respect to a fixing place between the mounting member and each of the pillars (Igarashi; fixing place between 30 and 31).
Regarding claim 11, Igarashi discloses a robot system (see Fig. 1) comprising: a robot (10); and a control device (40) that controls driving of the robot, wherein the robot includes a base (11), a first arm (12) that is joined to the base and that rotates around a first rotation axis (C1) with respect to the base, a second arm (15) that is joined to the first arm and that rotates around a second rotation axis (C2), which is parallel to the first rotation axis, with respect to the first arm, and an inertia sensor module (30) that is disposed at the second arm, the second arm has an arm base (see Fig. 2; 15a) that is joined to the first arm, a plurality of pillars (31) that are erected from the arm base toward one side (upper side in the figure) in a direction along the second rotation axis. Igarashi fails to disclose a mounting member and the inertia sensor module is fixed to the mounting member. However, Sugihara teaches a mounting member (see Fig. 1-3; 12) and the inertia sensor module (23, 24) is fixed to the mounting member (via 22). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Igarashi with an inertia sensor module fixed to a mounting member, as taught by Sugihara, to be held upright relative to the reference base to accurately position the acceleration sensors with respect to the orientation of the robot (see paragraph [0010]; to suppress the influence of external vibrations (see paragraph [0012]); and to accurately fix the acceleration sensors at appropriate positions so that the accuracy is mechanically ensured (see paragraph [0013]). The combination above is achieved by replacing the angular velocity sensor 30 of Igarashi with the sensor unit 10 of Sugihara. This combination would necessarily result in the following limitations: the mounting member (Sugihara; 12) is fixed to the plurality of pillars (Igarashi; 31).
Claim 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Igarashi (US 20170008170 A1) in view of Sugihara (US 20100089155 A1) and Sugimoto (US 20220241959 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Igarashi fails to disclose a through-hole. However, Sugimoto teaches a through-hole (see Fig. 1; 20). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Igarashi with through-holes, as taught by Sugimoto, to provide weight reduction to the robot elements and to allow for routing of pipes (see paragraph [0041]). In other words, providing through-holes in the parts of a robot reduces the weight of the robot, which reduces production costs and energy required to move the robot. Additionally, providing through-holes allows for the routing of pipes and/or cables through the robot elements which prevents snagging of the pipes and/or cables during the operation of the robot. The combination above would necessarily result in the following limitations: a mounting member through-hole (Sugimoto; 20) that penetrates the mounting member (Sugihara; 12) in the direction along the second rotation axis (Igarashi; C2).
Regarding claim 8, Igarashi fails to disclose a through-hole. However, Sugimoto teaches a through-hole (see Fig. 1; 20). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Igarashi with through-holes, as taught by Sugimoto, to provide weight reduction to the robot elements and to allow for routing of pipes (see paragraph [0041]). In other words, providing through-holes in the parts of a robot reduces the weight of the robot, which reduces production costs and energy required to move the robot. Additionally, providing through-holes allows for the routing of pipes and/or cables through the robot elements which prevents snagging of the pipes and/or cables during the operation of the robot. The combination above would necessarily result in the following limitations: an arm base (Igarashi; 15a) through-hole (Sugimoto; 20) that penetrates the arm base in the direction along the second rotation axis (Igarashi; C2), wherein the arm base through-hole is positioned between two pillars selected from the plurality of pillars (Igarashi; 31).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
US 20190389077 A1 and US 20230166395 A1 disclose SCARA robots with inertia sensors.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH BROWN whose telephone number is (313)446-6568. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8:00am - 5:00pm EST.
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 571-357-2384. 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.
/JOSEPH BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights