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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office action on the merits. Claims 16-35 are currently pending and addressed below.
Preliminary amendments filed and received on 06/03/2025 and have been accepted and approved.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/03/2025 has been received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/22/2026 has been received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/12/2026 has been received. The submission 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the pitch equilibrium angle" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the roll equilibrium angle information" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 17, 20-25, and 32-35 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-12, and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12, 325,125. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Table 1: Comparison of claims in Instant Application No. 19/226,381 vs US Patent No. 12,325,125
Instant Application No. 19/226,381
US Patent No. 12,325,125
16. (New) A manipulator comprising: a plurality of links respectively corresponding to a user's upper arm, forearm, and hand; a plurality of motors configured to rotate the plurality of links; a communication interface including communication circuitry; at least one memory configured to store instructions; and at least one processor including processing circuitry; wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
based on receiving an operation stopping command of a first user, stop an operation of the manipulator, based on receiving an operation initiating command of a second user to control the stopped manipulator, identify a difference between a first posture of the manipulator and a second posture of the second user's arm, and based on identifying the difference being within a preset threshold range, control the plurality of motors based on the second posture.
17. (New) The manipulator of claim 16, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: provide a guide screen for compensating the difference when the difference is outside the preset threshold range, and based on identifying that the difference becomes within the preset threshold range after the guide screen is provided, control the plurality of motors based on the second posture.
1. A manipulator comprising: a plurality of links respectively corresponding to a user's upper arm, fore arm, and hand; a plurality of motors configured to rotate the plurality of links; a communication interface comprising communication circuitry; a memory storing at least one instruction; and a processor configured to execute the at least one instruction, wherein the processor is configured to: …
7. The manipulator of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to:
based on receiving an instruction for stopping an operation of a first user while the manipulator is operating, inactivate an external sensor for recognizing the posture of the first user's arm, and stop the operation of the manipulator, based on receiving an instruction for initiating an operation of a second user for controlling the manipulator, control the communication interface to transmit information on a guide screen for compensating a difference between the posture of the manipulator and the posture of the second user's arm to the user terminal of the second user, and based on identifying a difference between the posture of the manipulator and the posture of the second user's arm being within a specified threshold range, control the plurality of motors based on the posture of the second user's arm.
16. (New) A manipulator comprising: a plurality of links respectively corresponding to a user's upper arm, forearm, and hand; a plurality of motors configured to rotate the plurality of links; a communication interface including communication circuitry; at least one memory configured to store instructions; and at least one processor including processing circuitry; wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: based on receiving an operation stopping command of a first user, stop an operation of the manipulator, based on receiving an operation initiating command of a second user to control the stopped manipulator, identify a difference between a first posture of the manipulator and a second posture of the second user's arm, and based on identifying the difference being within a preset threshold range, control the plurality of motors based on the second posture.
20. (New) The manipulator of claim 19, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: based on receiving an operation stopping command of the first user while the manipulator is operating, control the communication interface to transmit a control signal to deactivate an external sensor that recognizes a posture of the first user's arm, and stop the operation of the manipulator.
1. A manipulator comprising: a plurality of links respectively corresponding to a user's upper arm, fore arm, and hand; a plurality of motors configured to rotate the plurality of links; a communication interface comprising communication circuitry; a memory storing at least one instruction; and a processor configured to execute the at least one instruction, wherein the processor is configured to: …
7. The manipulator of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to: based on receiving an instruction for stopping an operation of a first user while the manipulator is operating, inactivate an external sensor for recognizing the posture of the first user's arm, and stop the operation of the manipulator, based on receiving an instruction for initiating an operation of a second user for controlling the manipulator, control the communication interface to transmit information on a guide screen for compensating a difference between the posture of the manipulator and the posture of the second user's arm to the user terminal of the second user, and based on identifying a difference between the posture of the manipulator and the posture of the second user's arm being within a specified threshold range, control the plurality of motors based on the posture of the second user's arm.
16. (New) A manipulator comprising:
a plurality of links respectively corresponding to a user's upper arm, forearm, and hand;
a plurality of motors configured to rotate the plurality of links;
a communication interface including communication circuitry;
at least one memory configured to store instructions; and
at least one processor including processing circuitry;
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
based on receiving an operation stopping command of a first user, stop an operation of the manipulator,
based on receiving an operation initiating command of a second user to control the stopped manipulator, identify a difference between a first posture of the manipulator and a second posture of the second user's arm, and
based on identifying the difference being within a preset threshold range, control the plurality of motors based on the second posture.
21. (New) The manipulator of claim 20, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
based on first rotation angle information for motors corresponding to the upper arm and the forearm among the plurality of motors, obtain information for a body frame of a link corresponding to the forearm,
obtain equilibrium angle information positioning the body frame in equilibrium with a specified reference frame,
based on receiving a sensing value indicating the posture of the hand from an external sensor through the communication interface, obtain second rotation angle information for motors corresponding to the hand among the plurality of motors based on the sensing value and the equilibrium angle information, and
control the motors corresponding to the hand based on the second rotation angle information.
1. A manipulator comprising:
a plurality of links respectively corresponding to a user's upper arm, fore arm, and hand;
a plurality of motors configured to rotate the plurality of links;
a communication interface comprising communication circuitry;
a memory storing at least one instruction; and
a processor configured to execute the at least one instruction,
wherein the processor is configured to:
…
7. The manipulator of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to: based on receiving an instruction for stopping an operation of a first user while the manipulator is operating, inactivate an external sensor for recognizing the posture of the first user's arm, and stop the operation of the manipulator, based on receiving an instruction for initiating an operation of a second user for controlling the manipulator, control the communication interface to transmit information on a guide screen for compensating a difference between the posture of the manipulator and the posture of the second user's arm to the user terminal of the second user, and based on identifying a difference between the posture of the manipulator and the posture of the second user's arm being within a specified threshold range, control the plurality of motors based on the posture of the second user's arm.
…
based on first rotation angle information for motors corresponding to the upper arm and the fore arm among the plurality of motors, obtain information for a body frame of a link corresponding to the fore arm,
obtain equilibrium angle information positioning the body frame in equilibrium with a specified reference frame,
based on receiving a sensing value indicating the posture of the hand from an external sensor through the communication interface, obtain second rotation angle information for motors corresponding to the hand among the plurality of motors based on the sensing value and the equilibrium angle information, and
control the motors corresponding to the hand based on the second rotation angle information.
22 (New) The manipulator of claim 21, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
calculate a frame conversion matrix for converting the first rotation angle information into a sensing value indicating the posture of the upper arm and the posture of the forearm, and
obtain information for the body frame corresponding to the forearm based on the frame conversion matrix.
2. The manipulator of claim 1,
wherein the processor is configured to:
calculate a frame conversion matrix for converting the first rotation angle information into a sensing value indicating the posture of the upper arm and the posture of the fore arm, and
obtain information for the body frame corresponding to the fore arm based on the frame conversion matrix.
32. (New) The method of claim 31, wherein obtaining the information for the body frame comprises: calculating a frame conversion matrix for converting the first rotation angle information into a sensing value indicating the posture of the upper arm and the posture of the forearm; and obtaining information for the body frame corresponding to the forearm based on the frame conversion matrix.
10. The method of claim 9, wherein the obtaining information for the body frame comprises: calculating a frame conversion matrix for converting the first rotation angle information into a sensing value indicating the posture of the upper arm and the posture of the fore arm; and obtaining information for the body frame corresponding to the fore arm based on the frame conversion matrix.
23. (New) The manipulator of claim 21, wherein the equilibrium angle information includes roll equilibrium angle information and pitch equilibrium angle information, and
the roll equilibrium angle information indicates an angle that positions a second axis of the body frame parallel to an xy plane of the reference frame based on rotating around the body frame based on a first axis of the body frame.
3. The manipulator of claim 1, wherein the equilibrium angle information includes roll equilibrium angle information and pitch equilibrium angle information, and the roll equilibrium angle information indicates an angle that positions a second axis of the body frame parallel to an xy plane of the reference frame based on rotating around the body frame based on a first axis of the body frame.
33. (New) The method of claim 31, wherein the equilibrium angle information includes roll equilibrium angle information and pitch equilibrium angle information, and the roll equilibrium angle information indicates an angle that positions a second axis of the body frame parallel to an xy plane of the reference frame based on rotating around the body frame based on a first axis of the body frame.
11. The method of claim 9, wherein the equilibrium angle information includes roll equilibrium angle information and pitch equilibrium angle information, and the roll equilibrium angle information indicates an angle that positions a second axis of the body frame parallel to an xy plane of the reference frame based on rotating around the body frame based on a first axis of the body frame.
24 (New) The manipulator of claim 21, wherein the pitch equilibrium angle information indicates an angle that positions a third axis of the body frame to coincide with a z axis of the reference frame based on rotating around the body frame based on a second axis of the body frame rotated according to the roll equilibrium angle information.
4. The manipulator of claim 3, wherein the pitch equilibrium angle information indicates an angle that positions a third axis of the body frame to coincide with a z axis of the reference frame based on rotating around the body frame based on the second axis of the body frame rotated according to the roll equilibrium angle information.
34. (New) The method of claim 33, wherein the pitch equilibrium angle information indicates an angle that positions a third axis of the body frame to coincide with a z axis of the reference frame based on rotating around the body frame based on a second axis of the body frame rotated according to the roll equilibrium angle information.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein the pitch equilibrium angle information indicates an angle that positions a third axis of the body frame to coincide with a z axis of the reference frame based on rotating around the body frame based on the second axis of the body frame rotated according to the roll equilibrium angle information.
25. (New) The manipulator of claim 16, wherein the plurality of links include a first link corresponding to the upper arm, a second link corresponding to the forearm, and a third link corresponding to the hand, and
the plurality of motors include a first motor configured to rotate the first link based on a first axis, a second motor configured to rotate the first link based on a second axis, a third motor configured to rotate the second link based on the first axis, a fourth motor configured to rotate the second link based on a third axis, a fifth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the first axis, and a sixth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the second axis.
6. The manipulator of claim 5, wherein the plurality of links include a first link corresponding to the upper arm, a second link corresponding to the fore arm, and a third link corresponding to the hand, and
the plurality of motors include a first motor configured to rotate the first link based on the first axis, a second motor configured to rotate the first link based on the second axis, a third motor configured to rotate the second link based on the first axis, a fourth motor configured to rotate the second link based on the third axis, a fifth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the first axis, and a sixth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the second axis.
35. (New) The method of claim 26, wherein the plurality of links include a first link corresponding to the upper arm, a second link corresponding to the forearm, and a third link corresponding to the hand, and the plurality of motors include a first motor configured to rotate the first link based on a first axis, a second motor configured to rotate the first link based on a second axis, a third motor configured to rotate the second link based on the first axis, a fourth motor configured to rotate the second link based on a third axis, a fifth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the first axis, and a sixth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the second axis.
14. The method of claim 13, wherein the plurality of links include a first link corresponding to the upper arm, a second link corresponding to the fore arm, and a third link corresponding to the hand, and the plurality of motors include a first motor configured to rotate the first link based on the first axis, a second motor configured to rotate the first link based on the second axis, a third motor configured to rotate the second link based on the first axis, a fourth motor configured to rotate the second link based on the third axis, a fifth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the first axis, and a sixth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the second axis.
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
Although conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because removing inherent and/or unnecessary limitation(s)/step(s) or adding an element and its function would be within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art. It is well settled that the adding or deleting of an element and its function(s) in the claim of the present application are an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA 1963). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App. 1969). Omission of a referenced element or step whose function is not needed would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Examiner further notes wherein although the claims are not identical (slightly broader), they are commensurate in scope to the claim limitations provided in the issued U.S. Patent, and likewise would anticipate the currently provided claim limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 16, 25-26, and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. (US 20180284760 A1), hereinafter Gupta in view of Lin et al. (US 20210146538 A1), hereinafter Lin and Di Guardo et al. (US 20240115337 A1), hereinafter Di Guardo.
Regarding claim 16, Gupta teaches:
16. (New) A manipulator comprising:
a plurality of links (Paragraph 0032, "The robotic picking unit 204 may include one or more mechanical arms 222 with an end-of-arm tool (EOAT) 224." Also see Figure 2.) …
a plurality of motors configured to rotate the plurality of links; (Paragraph 0049, "Additionally, the remote manipulation device may be used to control a positioning of the EOAT (e.g., by actuating one or more actuators on a mechanical arm or causing the robotic picking unit to move")
a communication interface including communication circuitry; (Paragraph 0016, "Communication between the robotic units and the control unit 110 may be established via any suitable communication mechanism. In some embodiments, communication may be established via a wireless local area network using a wireless router 112.")
at least one memory configured to store instructions; and
at least one processor including processing circuitry;
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: (Paragraph 0026, "In one illustrative configuration, the control unit 202 may include at least one memory 206 and one or more processing units (or processor(s)) 208. The processor(s) 208 may be implemented as appropriate in hardware, computer-executable instructions, firmware or combinations thereof. Computer-executable instruction or firmware implementations of the processor(s) 208 may include computer-executable or machine executable instructions written in any suitable programming language to perform the various functions described.")
based on receiving an operation stopping command of a first user, stop an operation of the manipulator, (Paragraph 0073, "For example, the operator of the remote manipulation device 242 may indicate that the request has been completed.")
based on receiving an operation initiating command of a second user to control the stopped manipulator, (Paragraph 0051, "Once the operator of remote manipulation device 406 has completed the requested manual operation, the control unit may sever the connection between the remote manipulation device 406 and the robotic picking unit 412. The control unit may then identify the next request for manual operation in the queue to be performed by the operator of the remote manipulation device 406. The process in this example may be repeated multiple times." as well as Paragraph 0045, "Submitted requests for manual operation may be transmitted to a control unit for subsequent assignment. In some embodiments, the control unit may determine which operators, from a number of operators, may be assigned the manual operation.") … and a second posture of the second user's arm, (Paragraph 0038, "Manipulation element 246 may include any suitable mechanism for receiving input from an operator and using that input to control one or more functions of the robotic picking unit. In some non-limiting examples, a manipulation element 246 may be a joystick, sensor gloves, or a motion tracking camera system (e.g., Kinect) based system.") and
… control the plurality of motors based on the second posture. (Paragraph 0017, "the user may control the robotic unit via a remote manipulation device 116")
Gupta does not specifically teach the links of the manipulator corresponding to the different portions of a user’s upper arm, forearm, and hand or identifying the difference between a user’s posture and a current posture of the manipulator. However, Lin, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… respectively corresponding to a user's upper arm, forearm, and hand; (Paragraph 0068, "the upper arm and forearm with cylinders, enveloping the torso and hands") …
However, Di Guardo, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… identify a difference between a first posture of the manipulator … based on identifying the difference being within a preset threshold range, … (Paragraph 0101, "In other words, such a check of alignment congruence comprises verifying that the difference between the orientations of the master and slave devices is below the aforesaid maximum orientation difference threshold." As well as Paragraph 0014, "By virtue of the proposed solutions, it is possible to achieve a satisfactory level of alignment between at least one unconstrained master device and at least one enslavable surgical instrument (of a slave device), safely and reliably, without for this reason imposing a predetermined movement of the master device and/or maintaining a certain acceptable level of control and intuitiveness for the operator." as well as Paragraph 0048, "the method is used for initiating and/or preparing and/or conducting a teleoperation carried out by the robotic system for medical or surgical teleoperation.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic system and methods of operation as taught by Gupta with the link structure corresponding to a user’s limb as taught by Lin as this would provide a user with more intuitive control/operation and further with the ability to synchronize/align the posture/positioning of the manipulator with the input device as taught by Di Guardo in order provide precise and intuitive control while improving the reliability of the operation.
Regarding claim 25, where all the limitations of claim 16 are discussed above, Gupta does not specifically teach the manipulator corresponding to an upper arm, a forearm, and a hand portions. However, Lin, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
25. (New) The manipulator of claim 16, wherein the plurality of links include a first link corresponding to the upper arm, a second link corresponding to the forearm, and a third link corresponding to the hand, and
the plurality of motors include a first motor configured to rotate the first link based on a first axis, a second motor configured to rotate the first link based on a second axis, a third motor configured to rotate the second link based on the first axis, a fourth motor configured to rotate the second link based on a third axis, a fifth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the first axis, and a sixth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the second axis. (Paragraph 0052, "Referring to FIG. 11, in one embodiment, a robot arm is constructed according to the mechanism characteristics of human arm movement, and the robot arm includes seven joints. The first, second, and third joints are used to imitate motion of the shoulder joint of the human arm. The fourth joint is used to imitate the motion of the elbow of the human arm. The fifth, sixth and seventh joints are used to imitate the motion of the wrist of the human arm.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic manipulator and methods of controlling such as taught by Gupta with the structure as taught by Lin. Providing the user with a manipulator corresponding to a human limb would allow for more intuitive operation of the system by a user.
Regarding claim 26, Gupta further teaches:
26. (New) A method for controlling a manipulator including a plurality of links (Paragraph 0032, "The robotic picking unit 204 may include one or more mechanical arms 222 with an end-of-arm tool (EOAT) 224." Also see Figure 2.) … and a plurality of motors configured to rotate the plurality of links, (Paragraph 0049, "Additionally, the remote manipulation device may be used to control a positioning of the EOAT (e.g., by actuating one or more actuators on a mechanical arm or causing the robotic picking unit to move") the method comprising:
based on receiving an operation stopping command of a first user, stopping an operation of the manipulator; (Paragraph 0073, "For example, the operator of the remote manipulation device 242 may indicate that the request has been completed.")
based on receiving an operation initiating command of a second user to control the stopped manipulator, (Paragraph 0051, "Once the operator of remote manipulation device 406 has completed the requested manual operation, the control unit may sever the connection between the remote manipulation device 406 and the robotic picking unit 412. The control unit may then identify the next request for manual operation in the queue to be performed by the operator of the remote manipulation device 406. The process in this example may be repeated multiple times." as well as Paragraph 0045, "Submitted requests for manual operation may be transmitted to a control unit for subsequent assignment. In some embodiments, the control unit may determine which operators, from a number of operators, may be assigned the manual operation.") … and a second posture of the second user's arm; (Paragraph 0038, "Manipulation element 246 may include any suitable mechanism for receiving input from an operator and using that input to control one or more functions of the robotic picking unit. In some non-limiting examples, a manipulation element 246 may be a joystick, sensor gloves, or a motion tracking camera system (e.g., Kinect) based system.") and
… controlling the plurality of motors based on the second posture. (Paragraph 0017, "the user may control the robotic unit via a remote manipulation device 116")
Gupta does not specifically teach the links of the manipulator corresponding to the different portions of a user’s upper arm, forearm, and hand or identifying the difference between a user’s posture and a current posture of the manipulator. However, Lin, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… respectively corresponding to a user's upper arm, forearm, and hand, (Paragraph 0068, "the upper arm and forearm with cylinders, enveloping the torso and hands") …
However, Di Guardo, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… identifying a difference between a first posture of the manipulator … based on identifying the difference being within a preset threshold range, … (Paragraph 0101, "In other words, such a check of alignment congruence comprises verifying that the difference between the orientations of the master and slave devices is below the aforesaid maximum orientation difference threshold." As well as Paragraph 0014, "By virtue of the proposed solutions, it is possible to achieve a satisfactory level of alignment between at least one unconstrained master device and at least one enslavable surgical instrument (of a slave device), safely and reliably, without for this reason imposing a predetermined movement of the master device and/or maintaining a certain acceptable level of control and intuitiveness for the operator." as well as Paragraph 0048, "the method is used for initiating and/or preparing and/or conducting a teleoperation carried out by the robotic system for medical or surgical teleoperation.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic system and methods of operation as taught by Gupta with the link structure corresponding to a user’s limb as taught by Lin as this would provide a user with more intuitive control/operation and further with the ability to synchronize/align the posture/positioning of the manipulator with the input device as taught by Di Guardo in order provide precise and intuitive control while improving the reliability of the operation.
Regarding claim 35, where all the limitations of claim 26 are discussed above, Gupta does not specifically teach the manipulator corresponding to an upper arm, a forearm, and a hand portions. However, Lin, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
35. (New) The method of claim 26, wherein the plurality of links include a first link corresponding to the upper arm, a second link corresponding to the forearm, and a third link corresponding to the hand, and
the plurality of motors include a first motor configured to rotate the first link based on a first axis, a second motor configured to rotate the first link based on a second
axis, a third motor configured to rotate the second link based on the first axis, a fourth motor configured to rotate the second link based on a third axis, a fifth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the first axis, and a sixth motor configured to rotate the third link based on the second axis. (Paragraph 0052, "Referring to FIG. 11, in one embodiment, a robot arm is constructed according to the mechanism characteristics of human arm movement, and the robot arm includes seven joints. The first, second, and third joints are used to imitate motion of the shoulder joint of the human arm. The fourth joint is used to imitate the motion of the elbow of the human arm. The fifth, sixth and seventh joints are used to imitate the motion of the wrist of the human arm.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic manipulator and methods of controlling such as taught by Gupta with the structure as taught by Lin. Providing the user with a manipulator corresponding to a human limb would allow for more intuitive operation of the system by a user.
Claim(s) 17-20 and 27-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. (US 20180284760 A1), hereinafter Gupta in view of Lin et al. (US 20210146538 A1), hereinafter Lin and Di Guardo et al. (US 20240115337 A1), hereinafter Di Guardo.
Regarding claim 17, where all the limitations of claim 16 are discussed above, Gupta further teaches:
17. (New) The manipulator of claim 16, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
… control the plurality of motors based on the second posture. (Paragraph 0017, "the user may control the robotic unit via a remote manipulation device 116")
Gupta does not specifically discuss a guide screen which instructs an operator on how to compensate for the identified difference in postures. However, Di Guardo, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… based on identifying that the difference becomes within the preset threshold range … (Paragraph 0101, "In other words, such a check of alignment congruence comprises verifying that the difference between the orientations of the master and slave devices is below the aforesaid maximum orientation difference threshold.")
However, Rod, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… provide a guide screen for compensating the difference when the difference is outside the preset threshold range, and
… after the guide screen is provided, … (Paragraph 0053, "The video controller 124 transmits a video signal, which causes the head-mounted display 2a to make a display, to the head-mounted display 2a via the transmitting controller 121 to cause the head-mounted display 2a to display the video. Specifically, the video controller 124 generates the guide video such that the posture error between the posture of the slave robot R and the posture of the operator U is reduced if the operator U moves according to the guide video displayed on the head-mounted display 2a. Thus, the operator U can smoothly synchronize with the slave robot R.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic system and operation methods as taught by Gupta with the ability to provide a user with guidance on how to align the manipulator with the input device as taught by Rod as well as to identify whether or not a threshold has been reached as taught by Di Guardo. This would ensure accurate operation of the manipulator as well as an intuitive and efficient operation interface for the user.
Regarding claim 18, where all the limitations of claim 17 are discussed above, Gupta does not specifically teach the posture being different above a threshold range and monitoring to identify if the posture becomes within the range. However, Rod, in the same field of endeavor of robotics teaches:
18. (New) The manipulator of claim 17, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
based on the difference being outside the preset threshold range, (Paragraph 0083, "If the posture error acquired by the posture comparing part 122 is out of the predetermined threshold range (NO in step S10) or if the predetermined period has not passed (NO in step S14), the control apparatus 1 returns to step S4 and repeats the process from step S4 to step S14.") identify whether the difference is within the preset threshold range at predetermined intervals until the difference becomes within the preset threshold range. (Paragraph 0084, "When the posture error acquired by the posture comparing part 122 is within the predetermined threshold range for the predetermined period of time (YES in step S14), the motion connecting part 123 starts transmitting the operation signal for operating the slave robot R generated on the basis of the change in the posture of the operator U (step S16). When the motion connecting part 123 starts transmitting the operation signal, the process in this flowchart ends.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic manipulator and methods of operation as taught by Gupta with the ability to monitor the alignment of the input device and the manipulator during the synchronization as taught by Rod. This would ensure that the operator is efficiently guided to the desired positioning/posture and may begin operation.
Regarding claim 19, where all the limitations of claim 17 are discussed above, Gupta further teaches:
19. (New) The manipulator of claim 17, further comprising a communication interface,
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
control the communication interface (Paragraph 0016, "Communication between the robotic units and the control unit 110 may be established via any suitable communication mechanism. In some embodiments, communication may be established via a wireless local area network using a wireless router 112.") …
Gupta does not specifically discuss a guide screen which instructs an operator on how to compensate for the identified difference in postures. However, Rod, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… to transmit information on the guide screen to a user terminal of the second user so that the guide screen is displayed on a display of the user terminal, (Paragraph 0053, "The video controller 124 transmits a video signal, which causes the head-mounted display 2a to make a display, to the head-mounted display 2a via the transmitting controller 121 to cause the head-mounted display 2a to display the video. Specifically, the video controller 124 generates the guide video such that the posture error between the posture of the slave robot R and the posture of the operator U is reduced if the operator U moves according to the guide video displayed on the head-mounted display 2a. Thus, the operator U can smoothly synchronize with the slave robot R.")
wherein the guide screen includes information on the first posture according to a final posture of the first user's arm and information on the second posture. (Paragraph 0081, "The video controller 124 causes the head-mounted display 2a to display the guide video for leading the operator U to take a posture such that the posture of the slave robot R and the posture of the operator U come to correspond with each other (step S2).")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic system and operation methods as taught by Gupta with the ability to provide a user with guidance on how to align the manipulator with the input device as taught by Rod. This would ensure accurate operation of the manipulator as well as an intuitive and comfortable operation interface for the user due to less discrepancy in sensation (See Rod, Paragraph 0005).
Regarding claim 20, where all the limitations of claim 19 are discussed above, Gupta further teaches:
20. (New) The manipulator of claim 19, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
based on receiving an operation stopping command of the first user while the manipulator is operating, (Paragraph 0073, "For example, the operator of the remote manipulation device 242 may indicate that the request has been completed.") control the communication interface (Paragraph 0016, "Communication between the robotic units and the control unit 110 may be established via any suitable communication mechanism. In some embodiments, communication may be established via a wireless local area network using a wireless router 112.") to transmit a control signal to deactivate an external sensor that recognizes a posture of the first user's arm, and stop the operation of the manipulator. (Paragraph 0050, "Once the operator of remote manipulation device 406 has completed the requested manual operation, the control unit may sever the connection between the remote manipulation device 406 and the robotic picking unit 402.")
Regarding claim 27, where all the limitations of claim 26 are discussed above, Gupta further teaches:
27. (New) The method of claim 26, further comprising:
… controlling the plurality of motors based on the second posture. (Paragraph 0017, "the user may control the robotic unit via a remote manipulation device 116")
Gupta does not specifically discuss a guide screen which instructs an operator on how to compensate for the identified difference in postures. However, Di Guardo, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… based on identifying that the difference becomes within the preset threshold range … (Paragraph 0101, "In other words, such a check of alignment congruence comprises verifying that the difference between the orientations of the master and slave devices is below the aforesaid maximum orientation difference threshold.")
However, Rod, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… providing a guide screen for compensating the difference when the difference is outside the preset threshold range; and
… after the guide screen is provided, … (Paragraph 0053, "The video controller 124 transmits a video signal, which causes the head-mounted display 2a to make a display, to the head-mounted display 2a via the transmitting controller 121 to cause the head-mounted display 2a to display the video. Specifically, the video controller 124 generates the guide video such that the posture error between the posture of the slave robot R and the posture of the operator U is reduced if the operator U moves according to the guide video displayed on the head-mounted display 2a. Thus, the operator U can smoothly synchronize with the slave robot R.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic system and operation methods as taught by Gupta with the ability to provide a user with guidance on how to align the manipulator with the input device as taught by Rod as well as to identify whether or not a threshold has been reached as taught by Di Guardo. This would ensure accurate operation of the manipulator as well as an intuitive and efficient operation interface for the user.
Regarding claim 28, where all the limitations of claim 27 are discussed above, Gupta does not specifically teach monitoring to identify if the posture becomes within the range. However, Rod, in the same field of endeavor of robotics teaches:
28. (New) The method of claim 27, further comprising:
identifying, at predetermined intervals, whether the difference is within the preset threshold range until the difference becomes within the preset threshold range. (Paragraph 0084, "When the posture error acquired by the posture comparing part 122 is within the predetermined threshold range for the predetermined period of time (YES in step S14), the motion connecting part 123 starts transmitting the operation signal for operating the slave robot R generated on the basis of the change in the posture of the operator U (step S16). When the motion connecting part 123 starts transmitting the operation signal, the process in this flowchart ends.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic manipulator and methods of operation as taught by Gupta with the ability to monitor the alignment of the input device and the manipulator during the synchronization as taught by Rod. This would ensure that the operator is efficiently guided to the desired positioning/posture and may begin operation.
Regarding claim 29, where all the limitations of claim 27 are discussed above, Gupta does not specifically discuss a guide screen which instructs an operator on how to compensate for the identified difference in postures. However, Rod, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
29. (New) The method of claim 27, further comprising:
transmitting information on the guide screen to a user terminal of the second user so that the guide screen is displayed on a display of the user terminal, (Paragraph 0053, "The video controller 124 transmits a video signal, which causes the head-mounted display 2a to make a display, to the head-mounted display 2a via the transmitting controller 121 to cause the head-mounted display 2a to display the video. Specifically, the video controller 124 generates the guide video such that the posture error between the posture of the slave robot R and the posture of the operator U is reduced if the operator U moves according to the guide video displayed on the head-mounted display 2a. Thus, the operator U can smoothly synchronize with the slave robot R.")
wherein the guide screen includes information on the first posture according to a final posture of the first user's arm and information on the second posture. (Paragraph 0081, "The video controller 124 causes the head-mounted display 2a to display the guide video for leading the operator U to take a posture such that the posture of the slave robot R and the posture of the operator U come to correspond with each other (step S2).")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic system and operation methods as taught by Gupta with the ability to provide a user with guidance on how to align the manipulator with the input device as taught by Rod. This would ensure accurate operation of the manipulator as well as an intuitive and comfortable operation interface for the user due to less discrepancy in sensation (See Rod, Paragraph 0005).
Regarding claim 30, where all the limitations of claim 29 are discussed above, Gupta further teaches:
30. (New) The method of claim 29, further comprising:
based on receiving an operation stopping command of the first user while the manipulator is operating, (Paragraph 0073, "For example, the operator of the remote manipulation device 242 may indicate that the request has been completed.") transmitting a control signal to deactivate an external sensor that recognizes a posture of the first user's arm, and stopping the operation of the manipulator. (Paragraph 0050, "Once the operator of remote manipulation device 406 has completed the requested manual operation, the control unit may sever the connection between the remote manipulation device 406 and the robotic picking unit 402.")
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-24 and 31-34 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome any rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, and any Double Patenting rejections set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the referencesapplied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations arerepresentative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the Applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. See MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed Invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEATHER KENIRY whose telephone number is (571)270-5468. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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.
/H.J.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3657
/ADAM R MOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights