Detailed Action
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/18/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the Examiner.
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-3, 7-10, and 12-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 9-10, and 13-20 of allowed US Patent Wang 550 (US Patent No. US 12,409,550 B2 hereinafter “Wang 550”).
US 19/303,348 clm 1
Wang 550 clm 1, 10
A casing element of robot comprising:
A robot system comprising: … a casing element disposed on the at least one of the movable parts (clm 1)
at least one vibration actuator,
the casing element comprising a vibration actuator; (clm 1)
an outer surface,
a casing element disposed on the at least one of the movable parts (clm 1)
a mechanical supporting structure supporting the outer surface,
movable parts having a base (clm 1)
and an electrical interface to connect with an electrical interface of a robot,
and one or more processors (clm 1)
wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate a vibration with a set magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the vibration.
wherein the vibration actuator is configured to alter a magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the haptic effect when the signal is indicative of the external object being within a threshold distance. (clm 1)
Regarding claim 2 Wang 550 discloses:
US 19/303,348 clm 2
Wang 550 clm 9
The casing element of robot of claim 1, wherein the electrical interface is configured to receive a signal from the robot to alter the magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the vibration.
… wherein the vibration actuator is configured to alter a magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the haptic effect
Regarding claim 3 Wang 550 discloses:
US 19/303,348 clm 3
Wang 550 clm 5
The casing element of robot of claim 1, further comprising a sensing transducer configured to generate a signal in response to an external object proximate the casing element.
… wherein the casing element further comprises a sensing transducer configured to generate a signal in response to an external object proximate the casing element.
Regarding claim 7 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 7
Wang 550 clm 19 clm 10, 16, 19
The casing element of robot of claim 4, wherein the vibration actuator vibrates a volume of air overlapping the casing element externally to the outer surface
using a set of vibration actuators on a casing element on the at least one movable part, vibration waves that constructively and destructively interfere in a volume of air overlapping the casing element (clm 19)
with the set magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the vibration,
wherein the vibration actuator is configured to alter a magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the haptic effect (clm 10)
and the sensor is configured to receive a reflected version of the vibration that has reflected off a proximate external object.
wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate an ultrasonic wave and wherein the sensing transducer is configured to receive a reflected version of the ultrasonic wave that has reflected off the external object. (clm 16)
Regarding claim 8 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 8
Wang 550 clm 8
The casing element of robot of claim 1, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate a haptic effect.
wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate a haptic effect in the guiding function.
Regarding claim 9 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 9
Wang 550 clm 9
The casing element of robot of claim 3, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to alter a magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the haptic effect
The robot system of claim 8, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to alter a magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the haptic effect
when the external object passes within a set range from the casing element.
when the external object passes within a set range from the casing element.
Regarding claim 10 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 10
Wang 550 clm 13
The casing element of robot of claim 5, further comprises one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors is configured to identify a predetermined touch gesture based on the signal and is configured to output a signal based on the identified predetermined pattern through the electrical interface.
wherein the one or more processors is configured to identify a predetermined gesture based on the signal and is configured to control the motion of the at least one of the movable parts based on the predetermined gesture, and wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate, based on a position for the gesture, a haptic effect comprising a two-dimensional or three-dimensional pattern in a set position overlapping the casing element.
Regarding claim 12 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 12
Wang 550 clm 13
The casing element of robot of claim 8, wherein the haptic effect comprising a two-dimensional or three-dimensional pattern in a set position overlapping the casing element.
… a haptic effect comprising a two-dimensional or three-dimensional pattern in a set position overlapping the casing element.
Regarding claim 13 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 13
Wang 550 clm 14
The casing element of robot of claim 4, wherein the casing element further comprises a visual indicator displaying information based on the signal.
The robot system of claim 7, wherein the casing element further comprises a visual indicator that is based on a position of a motion axis of the at least one of the movable parts.
Regarding claim 14 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 14
Wang 550 clm 10
The casing element of robot of claim 4, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to alter the magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the vibration according to the signal.
The robot system of claim 8, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to alter a magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the haptic effect when the signal is indicative of the external object being within a threshold distance.
Regarding claim 15 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 15
Wang 550 clm 16
The casing element of robot of claim 3, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate an ultrasonic wave and wherein the sensing transducer is configured to receive a reflected version of the ultrasonic wave that has reflected off the external object.
The robot system of claim 5, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate an ultrasonic wave and wherein the sensing transducer is configured to receive a reflected version of the ultrasonic wave that has reflected off the external object.
Regarding claim 16 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 16
Wang 550 clm 17
The casing element of robot of claim 1, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate an ultrasonic surface wave on the casing element, the casing element further comprises an ultrasonic surface sensor configured to receive the ultrasonic surface wave through the casing element,
The robot system of claim 1, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate an ultrasonic surface wave on the casing element, the casing element further comprises an ultrasonic surface sensor configured to receive the ultrasonic surface wave through the casing element,
and the sensor is further configured to identify a disruption to the ultrasonic surface wave from contact of an external object with the casing element.
and the one or more processors is further configured to identify a disruption to the ultrasonic surface wave from contact of an external object with the casing element.
Regarding claim 17 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 17
Wang 550 clm 19
The casing element of robot of claim 13, comprising, more than one vibration actuators generating vibration waves that constructively and destructively interfere in a volume of environmental medium overlapping the casing element to produce a three dimensional haptic pattern in the volume of environmental medium,
The method of claim 18, further comprising: generating, using a set of vibration actuators on a casing element on the at least one movable part, vibration waves that constructively and destructively interfere in a volume of air overlapping the casing element to produce a three dimensional haptic pattern in the volume of air,
wherein the three dimensional haptic pattern is configured to form a virtual manipulating device;
wherein the three dimensional haptic pattern is configured to form a virtual manipulating device for the robot system;
and wherein, the sensor detects an interaction between a user and the virtual manipulating device; and output a signal based on the detected interaction through the electrical interface.
detecting, using the one or more processors, an interaction between a user and the virtual manipulating device; and moving, using the actuator, the at least one movable part in accordance with the detected interaction.
Regarding claim 18 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 18
Wang 550 clm 20
The casing element of robot of claim 17, wherein the interaction comprises a grasping, by the user, of the virtual manipulating device, and wherein the virtual manipulating device comprises a virtual knob, a virtual handle, or a virtual six degree of freedom mouse formed from the three dimensional haptic pattern in the volume of the environmental medium.
The method of claim 19, wherein the interaction comprises a grasping, by the user, of the virtual manipulating device, and wherein the virtual manipulating device comprises a virtual knob, a virtual handle, or a virtual six degree of freedom mouse formed from the three dimensional haptic pattern in the volume of air.
Regarding claim 19 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 19
Wang 550 clm 10
The casing element of robot of claim 8, wherein the vibration actuator alters the haptic effect according to a signal received in the electrical interface.
The robot system of claim 8, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to alter a magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the haptic effect when the signal is indicative of the external object being within a threshold distance.
Regarding claim 20 Wang 550 discloses
US 19/303,348 clm 20
Wang 550 clm 13
The casing element of robot of claim 3, wherein the sensor is configured to identify a predetermined gesture based on the signal and is configured to output a signal based on the identified predetermined gesture through the electrical interface
The robot system of claim 7, wherein the one or more processors is configured to identify a predetermined gesture based on the signal and is configured to control the motion of the at least one of the movable parts based on the predetermined gesture,
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)(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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Qiu et al. (US Pre-Granted Publication No. US 2016/0181951 A1 hereinafter “Qiu”).
Regarding claim 1 Qiu discloses:
A casing element of robot comprising: at least one vibration actuator, (Qiu [0078-0081] wherein the robot includes vibrating ultrasonic systems to create vibrations to operate the actuator arm arrangements) an outer surface, (Qui [0069-0071] [0077] wherein the system includes robotic arms with an outer surface where the oscillators are attached or etched into, to control motions of the robot gripper) a mechanical supporting structure supporting the outer surface, (Qiu [0085] [0096] wherein the robotic arm with vibration actuators includes a base support structure and other components, such as an elastic deformable material to support the arm sections including the outer surface, see also Fig. 8) and an electrical interface to connect with an electrical interface of a robot, (Qiu [0068-0069] [0101] wherein the robot arm includes ultrasonic driver units to control the robot arm with various cable or wire connections) wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate a vibration with a set magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the vibration. (Qiu [0030] [0101] wherein the vibration actuators are capable of operating at different frequencies).
Regarding claim 2 Qiu discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 and Qiu further discloses:
The casing element of robot of claim 1, wherein the electrical interface is configured to receive a signal from the robot to alter the magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the vibration. (Qiu [0076-0077] wherein the system can operate at different frequencies of vibration based on the operation of various oscillators).
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.
Claims 3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu in view of Sato et al. (US Pre-Granted Publication No. US 2019/0368658 A1 hereinafter “Sato”).
Regarding claim 3 Qiu discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 but Qiu does not appear to disclose:
… further comprising a sensing transducer configured to generate a signal in response to an external object proximate the casing element.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Sato discloses:
“further comprising a sensing transducer configured to generate a signal in response to an external object proximate the casing element.” (Sato [0072-0073] wherein proximity sensors are used to determine distance and positions of the robot and user)
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the proximate object sensing of Sato with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to detect objects or persons in the environment around the robot without the need to make actual contact with the object (Sato [0072-0073]).
Regarding claim 9 Qiu in view of Sato discloses all of the limitations of claim 3 and Qiu further discloses:
The casing element of robot of claim 3, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to alter a magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the haptic effect (Qiu [0076-0077] wherein the system can operate at different frequencies of vibration based on the operation of various oscillators) …
Qiu does not appear to disclose:
… when the external object passes within a set range from the casing element.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Sato discloses:
“when the external object passes within a set range from the casing element.” (Sato [0027] wherein the robot operates in different modes based on the detection range of the robot).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the proximate object sensing of Sato with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to detect objects or persons in the environment around the robot without the need to make actual contact with the object (Sato [0072-0073]).
Claims 4-6, 8, 10, 13-14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu in view of Shukla (US Pre-Granted Publication No. US 2021/0290969 A1 hereinafter “Shukla”).
Regarding claim 4 Qiu discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 but Qiu does not appear to disclose:
… further comprising a sensor configured to generate a signal by detecting the vibration.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Shukla discloses:
“further comprising a sensor configured to generate a signal by detecting the vibration.” (Shukla [0101] wherein the system includes a sensor to determine orientation, vibration, or contact).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the vibration sensing of Shukla with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide feedback to the user during an operation including the robot, allowing them to know when deviations from a plan or desired movement are determined (Shukla [0101]).
Regarding claim 5 Qiu in view of Shukla disclose all of the limitations of claim 4 and Qiu further discloses:
The casing element of robot of claim 4, wherein the vibration actuator vibrates the outer surface with the set magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the vibration, (Qiu [0076-0077] wherein the system can operate at different frequencies of vibration based on the operation of various oscillators)…
Qiu does not appear to disclose:
… and the sensor is configured to generate a signal in response to an external object contacting the casing element.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Shukla discloses:
“and the sensor is configured to generate a signal in response to an external object contacting the casing element.” (Shukla [0101] [0185] wherein the system determines external objects making contact with the robot).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the contact sensing of Shukla with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide feedback to the user during an operation including the robot, allowing them to know when deviations from a plan or desired movement are determined while preventing damage or pain to a user or patient (Shukla [0101] [0185]).
Regarding claim 6 Qiu in view of Shukla disclose all of the limitations of claim 5 and Qiu further discloses:
The casing element of robot of claim 5, wherein the mechanical supporting structure comprises a deformable structure, (Qiu [0085] [0096] wherein the robotic arm with vibration actuators includes a base support structure and other components, such as an elastic deformable material to support the arm sections including the outer surface, see also Fig. 8) and the generated signal comprises a magnitude of the deformation of the deformable structure. (Qiu [0084-0085] wherein the deformable structure of the arm is capable of being controlled by the ultrasonic driver units).
Regarding claim 8 Qiu discloses all of the limitation of claim 1 but Qiu does not appear to disclose:
… wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate a haptic effect.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Shukla discloses:
“wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate a haptic effect.” (Shukla [0154] wherein the robot gives vibratory feedback to the user i.e. haptic feedback while manually moving).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the haptic effect of Shukla with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide feedback to the user during an operation including the robot, allowing them to know when deviations from a plan or desired movement are determined (Shukla [0101]).
Regarding claim 10 Qiu in view Shukla discloses all of the limitations of claim 5 but Qiu does not appear to disclose:
… further comprises one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors is configured to identify a predetermined touch gesture based on the signal and is configured to output a signal based on the identified predetermined pattern through the electrical interface.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Shukla discloses:
“further comprises one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors is configured to identify a predetermined touch gesture based on the signal and is configured to output a signal based on the identified predetermined pattern through the electrical interface.” (Shukla [0154] wherein the robot identifies predetermined grid patterns while moving by the user to determine a specific target and treatment area).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the predetermined gestures of Shukla with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide feedback to the user during an operation including the robot, allowing them to know when deviations from a plan or desired movement are determined (Shukla [0101]).
Regarding claim 13 Qiu in view of Shukla discloses all of the limitations of claim 4 but Qiu does not appear to disclose:
… wherein the casing element further comprises a visual indicator displaying information based on the signal.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Shukla discloses:
“wherein the casing element further comprises a visual indicator displaying information based on the signal.” (Shukla [0116] wherein the robot system includes a visual interface to display information about the robot control system).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the visual indications of Shukla with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow the user to determine feedback on the operations including visual to operate (Shukla [0154]).
Regarding claim 14 Qiu in view of Shukla discloses all of the limitations of claim 4 and Qiu further discloses:
The casing element of robot of claim 4, wherein the vibration actuator is configured to alter the magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the vibration according to the signal. (Qiu [0076-0077] wherein the system can operate at different frequencies of vibration based on the operation of various oscillators).
Regarding claim 19 Qiu in view of Shukla discloses all of the limitations of claim 8 and Qiu further discloses:
The casing element of robot of claim 8, wherein the vibration actuator alters the … effect according to a signal received in the electrical interface. (Qiu [0076-0077] wherein the system can operate at different frequencies of vibration based on the operation of various oscillators).
Qiu does not appear to explicitly disclose:
… the haptic effect according to a signal
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Shukla discloses:
“the haptic effect according to a signal” (Shukla [0154] wherein the robot gives vibratory feedback to the user i.e. haptic feedback while manually moving).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the haptic effect of Shukla with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide feedback to the user during an operation including the robot, allowing them to know when deviations from a plan or desired movement are determined (Shukla [0101]).
Regarding claim 20 Qiu discloses all of the limitations of claim 3 but Qiu does not appear to disclose:
… wherein the sensor is configured to identify a predetermined gesture based on the signal and is configured to output a signal based on the identified predetermined gesture through the electrical interface.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Shukla discloses:
“wherein the sensor is configured to identify a predetermined gesture based on the signal and is configured to output a signal based on the identified predetermined gesture through the electrical interface.” (Shukla [0154] wherein the robot identifies predetermined grid patterns while moving by the user to determine a specific target and treatment area).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the predetermined gestures of Shukla with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide feedback to the user during an operation including the robot, allowing them to know when deviations from a plan or desired movement are determined (Shukla [0101]).
Claims 7, 11, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu and Shukla as applied to claims 3 and 4 above, and further in view of Ueyama et al. (US Pre-Granted Publication No. US 2020/037519 A1 hereinafter “Ueyama”).
Regarding claim 7 Qiu in view of Shukla discloses all of the limitations of claim 4 and Qiu further discloses:
The casing element of robot of claim 4, wherein the vibration actuator vibrates a volume of air overlapping the casing element externally to the outer surface with the set magnitude, pulse shape, or frequency of the vibration, (Qiu [0081] wherein the system is operated based on the air passing over the vibrating elements and oscillating to control the arm) …
Qiu does not appear to disclose:
… and the sensor is configured to receive a reflected version of the vibration that has reflected off a proximate external object.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Ueyama discloses:
“and the sensor is configured to receive a reflected version of the vibration that has reflected off a proximate external object.” (Ueyama [0043] wherein the wave probe uses reflected waves to image the object of interest).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the reflected vibrations of Ueyama with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow the system to identify objects external to the robot during operation such as diagnostic or target identification without physically contacting the object (Ueyama [0003-0004] [0043]).
Regarding claim 11 Qiu in view of Shukla and Ueyama disclose all of the limitations of claim 7 but Qiu does not appear to disclose:
… further comprises one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors is configured to identify a predetermined gesture based on the signal and is configured to output a signal based on the identified predetermined gesture through the electrical interface.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Shukla discloses:
“further comprises one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors is configured to identify a predetermined gesture based on the signal and is configured to output a signal based on the identified predetermined gesture through the electrical interface.” (Shukla [0154] wherein the robot identifies predetermined grid patterns while moving by the user to determine a specific target and treatment area).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the predetermined gestures of Shukla with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide feedback to the user during an operation including the robot, allowing them to know when deviations from a plan or desired movement are determined (Shukla [0101]).
Regarding claim 15 Qiu in view of Shukla discloses all of the limitations of claim 3 but Qiu does not appear to further disclose:
… wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate an ultrasonic wave and wherein the sensing transducer is configured to receive a reflected version of the ultrasonic wave that has reflected off the external object.
However, in the same field of endeavor of robotic controls Ueyama discloses:
“wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate an ultrasonic wave and wherein the sensing transducer is configured to receive a reflected version of the ultrasonic wave that has reflected off the external object.” (Ueyama [0043] wherein the wave probe uses reflected waves to image the object of interest).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the reflected vibrations of Ueyama with the robotic system of Qiu with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow the system to identify objects external to the robot during operation such as diagnostic or target identification without physically contacting the object (Ueyama [0003-0004] [0043]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 and 16-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if all double patenting rejections are overcome and the claims are rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claims 12 and 16-18 the relevant art Qiu in view of Shukla in view of Ueyama discloses a system for identifying objects based on a vibration around a casing around a robot but fails to disclose creating a 2D or 3D pattern overlapping the robot, or identifying the constructively and destructively interfering vibrational waves or creating various virtual control devices. Specifically, the relevant art fails to disclose “wherein the haptic effect comprising a two-dimensional or three-dimensional pattern in a set position overlapping the casing element” or “wherein the vibration actuator is configured to generate an ultrasonic surface wave on the casing element, the casing element further comprises an ultrasonic surface sensor configured to receive the ultrasonic surface wave through the casing element, and the sensor is further configured to identify a disruption to the ultrasonic surface wave from contact of an external object with the casing element” or “comprising, more than one vibration actuators generating vibration waves that constructively and destructively interfere in a volume of environmental medium overlapping the casing element to produce a three dimensional haptic pattern in the volume of environmental medium, wherein the three dimensional haptic pattern is configured to form a virtual manipulating device; and wherein, the sensor detects an interaction between a user and the virtual manipulating device; and output a signal based on the detected interaction through the electrical interface” or “wherein the interaction comprises a grasping, by the user, of the virtual manipulating device, and wherein the virtual manipulating device comprises a virtual knob, a virtual handle, or a virtual six degree of freedom mouse formed from the three dimensional haptic pattern in the volume of the environmental medium.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2011/0178508 A1 discloses a system with haptic effects being shared with an actuator signal
US 2018/0361594 A1 discloses a robotic system with haptic gesture controls to perform a predetermined operation
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kyle T Johnson whose telephone number is (303)297-4339. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00-5:00 MT.
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, Wade Miles can be reached at (571) 270-7777. 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.
/KYLE T JOHNSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3656
