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 .
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.
Joint Inventors
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 1-7, 9, 11-13 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Niwa et al. (US 20140070751 A1), hereinafter Niwa.
Regarding claim 1, Niwa discloses:
An end effector for arrangement on a handling apparatus (see at least Fig. 15, Motor 2. See further [0004]: “In motor control apparatuses for driving motors in machine tools, forging presses, injection molding machines, industrial machines, and robots…”), the end effector comprising:
at least one effector element movable by means of an electric drive (see at least Fig. 15, Motor 2.)
a feedback protection device (see at least Fig. 15, resistance discharge unit 413) integrated in the end effector for receiving and/or converting a feedback voltage during braking of the electric drive (see at least [0064]: “Further, during deceleration of the motor 2, regenerative power is generated, and based on the motor drive command received from the superior control apparatus, AC power that is the regenerative power generated in the motor 2 is converted into DC power to be then returned to the DC link. In this manner, the inverter 112 performs power interconversion of DC power in the DC link and AC power that is driving power or regenerative power of the motor 2 based on a received motor drive command.”),
and a control device (Fig. 15, item 423.) for controlling the feedback protection device, which is configured to control the feedback protection device based of an average value of a current voltage (see at least [0010]: “Further, the voltage detection part 422 detects a voltage of a DC output side of the rectifier 411 (in other words, a voltage of a smoothing capacitor C). ”) and an activation limit voltage and/or deactivation limit voltage (Fig. 14, start level/stop level), the activation limit voltage and/or the deactivation limit voltage being determined from the current voltage and an activation offset and/or a deactivation offset (see at least [0089]: “These resistance discharge units 213-1 and 213-2 each include an individual resistance discharge part, resistance discharge unit voltage detection part, discharge operation determination part, voltage correction amount calculation part, and voltage correction part.”)
Regarding claim 2, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 1, wherein the feedback protection device comprises at least one load resistor for converting a feedback voltage into heat (See at least Fig. 15, Resistor R.)
Regarding claim 3, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 1, wherein the feedback protection device comprises a switch for activating and deactivating the feedback protection device (see at least Fig. 15, Switching Device S)
Regarding claim 4, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 1, wherein the end effector has an electrical interface for connection to an electrical energy source for supplying energy to the electric drive, and wherein the feedback protection device is connected to a supply line that electrically connects the electrical interface and the electric drive (see at least Fig. 15, DC intermediate circuit)
Regarding claim 5, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 2, wherein the feedback protection device is designed such that the switch, in an activation state, electrically connects the at least one load resistor to the supply line and/or, in a deactivation state, electrically disconnects the at least one load resistor from the supply line (see at least Fig. 15, Switching Device S)
Regarding claim 6, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 4, wherein the end effector has a voltage measuring device for measuring a first variable which characterizes an actual voltage applied to the supply line (see at least Fig. 15, Voltage smoothing on capacitor, voltage measuring device 422.)
Regarding claim 7, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 1, wherein the feedback protection device, in particular the at least one load resistor and/or the switch, is arranged on a first circuit board (see at least Fig. 15.)
Regarding claim 9, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 1, wherein the control device is arranged on a second circuit board (See at least Fig. 15.)
Regarding claim 11, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 10, wherein the control device is configured to activate the feedback protection device when an actual voltage applied to the supply line exceeds an activation threshold voltage and in particular when the end effector is in a generator operating state, and/or to deactivate the feedback protection device when an actual voltage applied to the supply line falls below a deactivation threshold voltage and in particular when the end effector is in a motor operating state (See at least Fig. 14, Start and Stop levels.)
Regarding claim 12, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 1, wherein the feedback protection device comprises a temperature-dependent protection circuit which is designed such that it can change into an interruption state (see at least Fig. 10-11. See further [0111]: “These resistance discharge units 313-1 and 313-2 each include an individual resistance discharge part, voltage detection part, discharge operation determination part, temperature information production part, and discharge operation condition setting part.”)
Regarding claim 13, Niwa discloses:
A method for operating an end effector, comprising the following steps:
measuring an actual voltage applied to a supply line of the end effector (see at least [0010]: “Further, the voltage detection part 422 detects a voltage of a DC output side of the rectifier 411 (in other words, a voltage of a smoothing capacitor C).”)
if the actual voltage exceeds an activation threshold voltage, activating a feedback protection device integrated in the end effector, wherein the activation limit voltage is determined from the actual voltage and an activation offset, and/or if the actual voltage falls below a deactivation threshold voltage, deactivating the feedback protection device integrated in the end effector (see at least Fig. 15. See further fig. 14, start level, stop level. See further [0089]: “These resistance discharge units 213-1 and 213-2 each include an individual resistance discharge part, resistance discharge unit voltage detection part, discharge operation determination part, voltage correction amount calculation part, and voltage correction part.”)
Regarding claim 15, Niwa discloses:
The method in accordance with claim 13, wherein the feedback protection device in accordance with step b) is activated only when the actual voltage exceeds the activation threshold voltage and when the end effector is in a generator operating state (See at least Fig. 14, Start and Stop levels.)
Regarding claim 16, Niwa discloses:
The method in accordance with claim 13, wherein the feedback protection device in accordance with step c) is deactivated only when the actual voltage falls below a deactivation threshold voltage and/or if the end effector is in a motor operating state (See at least Fig. 14, Start and Stop levels.)
Regarding claim 17, Niwa discloses:
The method in accordance with claim 13, wherein the measured actual voltage is filtered to determine a mean value of the actual voltage, in particular by means of an infinite impulse response filter (see at least Fig. 15, Voltage smoothing on capacitor, voltage measuring device.)
Regarding claim 18, Niwa discloses:
The method in accordance with claim 17, wherein the activation threshold voltage is determined by adding an activation offset to the mean value (see at least Fig. 15, Voltage smoothing on capacitor, voltage measuring device.)
Regarding claim 19, Niwa discloses:
The method in accordance with claim 17, wherein the deactivation threshold voltage is determined by adding a deactivation offset to the mean value (see at least Fig. 15, Voltage smoothing on capacitor, voltage measuring device.)
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.
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.
Claims 8, 10, 14, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niwa in view of Pence et al. (US 20140211344 A1), hereinafter Pence.
Regarding claim 8, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 1.
Niwa does not explicitly disclose, but Pence teaches:
wherein the control device is configured to control the electric drive and to activate and deactivate the feedback protection device (see at least Fig. 3, processor 60)
It would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to combine the invention of Niwa with the control device of Pence. This is because as stated in [0019] of Pence: “In view of the problems, an object of the present invention is to provide a motor control apparatus having enhanced maintenance efficiency including a resistance discharge unit for consuming regenerative energy from a motor by resistance discharge.”
Regarding claim 10, Niwa discloses:
The end effector in accordance with claim 4.
Niwa does not explicitly disclose, but Pence teaches:
wherein the control device is configured such that it activates or deactivates the feedback protection device depending on an actual voltage applied to the supply line and/or an operating state of the end effector, in particular a motor operating state and a generator operating state (see at least Fig. 4, steps 106, 108 and 110.)
It would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to combine the invention of Niwa with the control device of Pence. This is because as stated in [0019] of Pence: “In view of the problems, an object of the present invention is to provide a motor control apparatus having enhanced maintenance efficiency including a resistance discharge unit for consuming regenerative energy from a motor by resistance discharge.”
Regarding claim 14, Niwa discloses:
The method in accordance with claim 13.
Niwa does not explicitly teach, but Pence discloses:
wherein the method comprises the following step before step b): detecting an operating state of the end effector, in particular a generator operating state or a motor operating state (see at least Fig. 4, steps 106, 108 and 110.)
It would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to combine the invention of Niwa with the control device of Pence. This is because as stated in [0019] of Pence: “In view of the problems, an object of the present invention is to provide a motor control apparatus having enhanced maintenance efficiency including a resistance discharge unit for consuming regenerative energy from a motor by resistance discharge.”
Regarding claim 20, Niwa discloses:
The method in accordance with claim 13.
Niwa does not explicitly disclose, but Pence teaches:
wherein an error is triggered and/or an error message is issued if, with the feedback protection device activated, the actual voltage does not fall below the deactivation threshold voltage after a maximum active time (see at least Fig. 4, “Voltage detection error.”)
It would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to combine the invention of Niwa with the control device of Pence. This is because as stated in [0019] of Pence: “In view of the problems, an object of the present invention is to provide a motor control apparatus having enhanced maintenance efficiency including a resistance discharge unit for consuming regenerative energy from a motor by resistance discharge.”
Regarding claim 21, Niwa discloses:
The method in accordance with claim 13.
Niwa does not explicitly disclose, but Pence teaches:
A computer program comprising instructions which, when the computer program is executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method in accordance with claim 13, wherein the computer program comprises firmware executable on a microcontroller (See at least [0014]: “The term "logic" or "control logic" as used herein includes software and/or firmware executing on one or more programmable processors, application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs), field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), digital signal processors (DSPs), hardwired logic, or combinations thereof. ”)
It would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to combine the invention of Niwa with the control device of Pence. This is because as stated in [0019] of Pence: “In view of the problems, an object of the present invention is to provide a motor control apparatus having enhanced maintenance efficiency including a resistance discharge unit for consuming regenerative energy from a motor by resistance discharge.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH NELESKI whose telephone number is (571)272-6064. The examiner can normally be reached 10 - 6.
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, THOMAS WORDEN can be reached at (571) 272-4876. 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.
/JASON HOLLOWAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658 /E.R.N./Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights