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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/17/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Murakami (US 20170095932 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Murakami teaches a robot manipulation device to be mounted on a robot (Fig 1) that detects a force applied by an operator and can be operated by lead-through control in which a position and a posture thereof are changed in accordance with the detected force (0008 “When an operator grips the handle 106 and applies a force to the handle 106 in a direction in which the arm unit 102 is moved, the direction and magnitude of the force are detected by the force sensor 105 … Accordingly, the robot control apparatus moves the distal end part of the arm unit 102 in accordance with the direction and magnitude of the detected force”), the robot manipulation device comprising:
a bracket for attaching a tool to a flange disposed at a leading end of the robot (Fig 1-7 wherein intermediate section including part 17, 30 is provided for attaching a tool); and
first and second handles secured to the bracket and gripped by the operator (Fig 1), wherein the first handle is disposed so as to extend along a direction intersecting a rotation axis of the flange (Fig 1-7, at least para 0039, 0051-53 wherein the handle 16B is provided extending along the direction intersecting the rotation axis), and
the second handle is disposed so as to extend in a direction intersecting a plane which includes the rotation axis and is parallel to a direction in which the first handle extends (Fig 1-7, at least para 0039, 0051-53 wherein the handle 16A is provided extending in the direction intersecting a plane that includes the rotation axis).
Regarding claim 2, Murakami teaches wherein the tool is attached to the bracket at an eccentric position with respect to the rotation axis (Fig 4 wherein the tool 27 is at an offset from the rotation axis).
Regarding claim 3, Murakami teaches wherein the second handle is disposed on an opposite side from the first handle, sandwiching the rotation axis therebetween (Fig 1-7 wherein the handles 16A and 16B are opposite from each other).
Regarding claim 6, Murakami teaches wherein at least one of the first handle or the second handle includes a rod-like grip portion that the operator grips with his/her hand and a protrusion that is provided at a leading end of the grip portion and that protrudes from a surface of the grip portion (Fig 1-7 wherein the handles have rod like shape and protrusion at the end of the handle).
Regarding claim 13, Murakami teaches a robot comprising the robot manipulation device (Fig 1).
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) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami (US 20170095932 A1) in view of Ghazaei (US 20190358817 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Murakami teaches all the limitations of claim 6 including the protrusion. However, Murakami fails to teach the protrusion is spherical.
Ghazaei teaches a robot teaching method wherein a teaching handle with spherical protrusion is provided (Fig 1, handle 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Murakami’s teachings of having a protrusion provided at a leading end of the grip portion to incorporate Ghazaei’s teachings of wherein the protrusion is spherical. Doing so would constitute combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5, 7-11 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Brogardh (US 20090259412 A1) teaches a robot with lead through control using first handle and second handle wherein herein the first handle is disposed so as to extend along a direction intersecting a rotation axis, and the second handle is disposed so as to extend in a direction intersecting a plane which includes the rotation axis and is parallel to a direction in which the first handle extends (at least Fig 3, 17; para 0111, 0129-0131).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAGAR KC whose telephone number is (571)272-7337. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5 pm.
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, Adam Mott can be reached at (571) 270-5376. 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.
/SAGAR KC/Examiner, Art Unit 3657
/ADAM R MOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights