Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/205,395

Robot System

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
May 12, 2025
Priority
Jun 26, 2024 — JP 2024-103058
Examiner
OH, HARRY Y
Art Unit
3657
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Daihen Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 3m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
595 granted / 699 resolved
+33.1% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
725
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
69.5%
+29.5% vs TC avg
§102
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§112
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 699 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Priority The applicant’s claim to priority of JP2024-103058 on 6/26/2024 is acknowledged. Information Disclosure Statement The applicant filed an IDS on 5/12/25 or 10/31/25. Each has been annotated and considered. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: switch portion, mode setting unit and operating disabling unit. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.Regarding claim 1, the limitation “external forces” lacks written description. The Specification only discloses these external forces are only manually applied by an operator. However, as the claim is written, these external forces can be provided by other external force generators known in the art. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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)(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. Claims 1 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yokoyama (JP 7449441 hereinafter Yokoyama). Regarding claim 1, Yokoyama teaches a robot system comprising: a tool portion attached to a distal end of a robot arm of a cooperative robot (See at least: Figs. 1 and 2; “The teaching handle 40 is a member that, when held by an operator of the welding robot 1, teaches the robot body 10 an operation corresponding to the position to which the torch tip 21t moves by an external force applied by the operator to the tip of the robot body 10.”); a switch portion that causes, when switched to an on state, the cooperative robot to be operable according to an external force (See at least: “An operation switch 46 is disposed on the end face 45b on the handle tip 40t side of the surface 45a of the raised portion 45. The operation switch 46 is a switch that allows the robot body 10, whose movement is restricted, to move due to an external force. Since the operation switch 46 is disposed on the end face on the handle tip 40t side of the surface of the raised portion 45, the operation switch 46 can be easily pressed with the index finger F2 of the operator while the operator places his/her fingers F3 through F5 on the raised portion 45….6. Manual welding and teaching The teaching of the welding robot in manual welding and automatic welding using the welding robot 1 will be described below together with its effects. For example, in the case of manual welding, (a) the operator (worker) sets the manual welding mode by using the function button 42. When the operator presses the operation switch 46 once, the mechanical or electrical lock of the first to sixth motors is released. This allows the operator to hold the teaching handle 40 and move the torch tip 21t of the torch body 21 along the welding line while changing the posture of the robot body 10 by the external force (operation force) from the teaching handle 40 in accordance with the welding operation. Specifically, the above-mentioned control device controls the driving of the first to sixth motors of the robot body 10 in response to a signal detected by the external force from the teaching handle 40 from the above-mentioned torque sensors of each axis attached to the robot body 10, or a force sensor (not shown) that measures each force in three-dimensional directions applied to the tip of the robot body 10.”); a button to which a specific function is assigned (See at least: As shown in FIG. 3, a display panel 44, a function lever 43, and a number of function buttons 42 are arranged on the top surface 41f of the handle body 41, in that order from the handle tip 40t side. A stop button 48 is attached to the end face of the handle tip 40t.); a mode setting unit that sets an operation mode for operating the cooperative robot (See at least: “An operation switch 46 is disposed on the end face 45b on the handle tip 40t side of the surface 45a of the raised portion 45. The operation switch 46 is a switch that allows the robot body 10, whose movement is restricted, to move due to an external force.); and an operation disabling unit that disables an operation on the button while the operation mode is set to a direct operation mode in which an operator directly applies the external force to the cooperative robot by hand and operates the cooperative robot by moving the cooperative robot according to the external force, and the switch portion is maintained in the on state (See at least: “For example, when teaching, if the operator (worker) sets the function button 42 to the first teaching mode (b), the mechanical or electrical lock of the first to sixth motors is continuously released by continuing to press the operation switch 46. As a result, the operator holds the teaching handle 40 and continues to press the operation switch 46 in accordance with the welding operation, and moves the torch tip 21t of the welding torch 20 along the welding line while changing the posture of the robot body 10 due to the external force (operation force) from the teaching handle 40. Specifically, as described above, the above-mentioned control device controls the drive of the first to sixth motors of the robot body 10 in response to the signal detected from the above-mentioned torque sensor or force sensor due to the external force from the teaching handle 40. At this time, the rotational positions of the first to sixth motors are calculated based on the detection signal of the encoder (not shown) of the first to sixth motors. This allows the operator to teach the welding operation of the robot body 10. For example, when teaching, if the operator (worker) sets the function button 42 to the second teaching mode (c), the operator can perform teaching similar to that performed by a commonly known teaching pendant by operating the function lever 43, etc. Therefore, a detailed description will be omitted.”), wherein the switch portion and the button are provided on any one of the robot arm or a member attached to the robot arm and attached at a position different from the tool portion (See at least: Figs. 3 and 4). Regarding claim 2, Yokoyama teaches wherein the switch portion is maintained in the on state as the operator continues to press the switch portion (See at least: “Specifically, the first to sixth motors described above are attached to the robot body 10, and when the operation switch 46 is not pressed (OFF state), the first to sixth motors are mechanically or electrically locked. When the operation switch 46 is pressed (ON state), the mechanical or electrical lock of the first to sixth motors is released. Here, the lock may be set to continue by continuing to press the operation switch 46, or the lock may be set to switch between lock and unlock by pressing the operation switch 46 once. In this way, the restriction (lock) on the movement of the robot body 10 is released, and movement of the robot body 10 is permitted.”). Regarding claim 3, Yokoyama teaches a torch mount disposed between the distal end of the robot arm and the tool portion, wherein the switch portion and the button are provided on the torch mount (See at least: Figs. 1-4 items 21 “torch body”, item 46 “operation switch”; “As shown in Figure 4, the torch body 21 and teaching handle 40 are viewed from the side with the teaching handle 40 supported by the handle support 35. In this side view, the teaching handle 40 extends in a direction away from the second portion 21b from the bent portion 21k to the torch tip 21t, sandwiching the first torch imaginary line T1 along the first portion 21a of the torch body 21 from the torch base end 21p to the bent portion 21k.”). Regarding claim 4, Yokoyama teaches wherein the specific function is a function related to movement of the cooperative robot (See at least: The function button 42 is a switch for switching between (a) a manual welding mode by the operator (worker), (b) a first teaching mode in which the operator (worker) teaches the robot body 10 a welding operation by using an external force, and (c) a second teaching mode in which the operator (worker) sends an operation signal to the robot body 10 by operating the function lever 43, etc., and operates the robot body 10 to teach the robot body 10 a welding operation. The state of the robot body 10, including such modes, etc., is displayed on the display panel 44. Furthermore, the stop button 48 is a button for forcibly stopping the welding robot 1 in an emergency, etc. The signal output by the operator's operation of the function button 42 and the function lever 43 is transmitted to the above-mentioned control device via a cable 49 connected to the handle base end 40p of the teaching handle 40.). Regarding claim 5, Yokoyama teaches wherein the specific function is a function related to a tool operation (See at least: The function button 42 is a switch for switching between (a) a manual welding mode by the operator (worker), (b) a first teaching mode in which the operator (worker) teaches the robot body 10 a welding operation by using an external force, and (c) a second teaching mode in which the operator (worker) sends an operation signal to the robot body 10 by operating the function lever 43, etc., and operates the robot body 10 to teach the robot body 10 a welding operation. The state of the robot body 10, including such modes, etc., is displayed on the display panel 44. Furthermore, the stop button 48 is a button for forcibly stopping the welding robot 1 in an emergency, etc. The signal output by the operator's operation of the function button 42 and the function lever 43 is transmitted to the above-mentioned control device via a cable 49 connected to the handle base end 40p of the teaching handle 40.). Regarding claim 6, Yokoyama teaches wherein the specific function is a function of changing a pattern of a function to be assigned to the button (See at least: The function button 42 is a switch for switching between (a) a manual welding mode by the operator (worker), (b) a first teaching mode in which the operator (worker) teaches the robot body 10 a welding operation by using an external force, and (c) a second teaching mode in which the operator (worker) sends an operation signal to the robot body 10 by operating the function lever 43, etc., and operates the robot body 10 to teach the robot body 10 a welding operation. The state of the robot body 10, including such modes, etc., is displayed on the display panel 44. Furthermore, the stop button 48 is a button for forcibly stopping the welding robot 1 in an emergency, etc. The signal output by the operator's operation of the function button 42 and the function lever 43 is transmitted to the above-mentioned control device via a cable 49 connected to the handle base end 40p of the teaching handle 40.). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harry Oh whose telephone number is (571)270-5912. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 9:00-3:00. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abby Lin can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /HARRY Y OH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 12, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112
Jul 09, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12678943
Autonomous Object Learning by Robots Triggered by Remote Operators
3y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12673427
PROBABILISTIC APPROACH TO UNIFYING REPRESENTATIONS FOR ROBOTIC MAPPING
2y 10m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12667975
ROBOTIC POLISHING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR USING SAME
2y 6m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12667967
MULTI-AXIS ROBOTIC VIAL LOADING SYSTEM
1y 8m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12661706
BINDING SYSTEM, METHOD FOR CONTROLLING BINDING DEVICE, AND COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM STORING PROGRAM
3y 5m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+17.6%)
2y 6m (~1y 3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 699 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month