UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/405,531
`
`01/ 13/2017
`
`EIJI TAKAHASHI
`
`PANDP0189US
`
`7179
`
`MARK D. SARALINO (PAN)
`RENNER, OTTO, BOIS SELLE & SKLAR, LLP
`1621 EUCLID AVENUE
`19TH FLOOR
`CLEVELAND, OH 441 15
`
`DOMINIQUE EMMANUEL
`
`ART UNIT
`2836
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`04/19/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`ipdoeket@rennerotto.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`0/7709 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/405,531
`Examiner
`EMMANUEL DOMINIQUE
`
`Applicant(s)
`TAKAHASHI et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA (FITF) Status
`2836
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 3—25—2019.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`1—19 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) 1—4 and 12—19 is/are rejected.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[:1 Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.'sp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10):] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 1—13—2017 is/are: a). accepted or b)C] objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a). All
`
`b)|:] Some**
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.|:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3D Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190410
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Page 2
`
`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.
`
`Election/Restrictions
`
`Applicant's election with traverse of species II in the reply filed on 3—25—2019 is
`
`acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that both species are classified in the same
`
`field of search. This argument is found persuasive therefore claims 2 and 3 are also examined.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`Claim 18 objected to because ofthe following informalities: claim 18 recites a second
`
`rotating mechanism however a first rotating mechanism is absent. Should claim 18 depend
`
`from claim 17 instead of 13? Appropriate correction is required.
`
`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,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Page 3
`
`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 ofthe A|A 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.
`
`Claim 1, 13 is/are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double
`
`patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 15/397,914
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Page 4
`
`(reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably
`
`distinct from each other because
`
`15/405,531
`
`15/397,914
`
`l) a first arm extending in a first direction;
`
`1) a first arm extending in a first direction
`
`2) a second arm supported by the first arm;
`
`2) a second arm supported by the first arm
`
`and
`
`connected to the power reception antenna,
`
`3) a first linear actuator that is provided in
`
`3) a linear actuator that is provided in the
`
`the first arm or the second arm and moves
`
`first arm or the second arm and moves the
`
`the second arm along the first direction with
`
`second arm along the first direction with
`
`respect to the first arm,
`
`respect to the first arm
`
`4) wherein the first arm includes a first
`
`4) wherein the first arm includes a power
`
`power transmission antenna,
`
`transmission antenna
`
`5) the second arm includes a first power
`
`5) the second arm includes a power
`
`reception antenna,
`
`reception antenna
`
`6) the first power transmission antenna
`
`6) the power transmission antenna supplies
`
`supplies electric power to the first power
`
`electric power to the power reception
`
`reception antenna wirelessly, and
`
`antenna wirelessly,
`
`7) the first power reception antenna
`
`7) the power reception antenna supplies the
`
`supplies the supplied electric power to a load
`
`supplied electric power to a load electrically
`
`electrically connected to the first power
`
`reception antenna.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Page 5
`
`This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably
`
`indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability ofthe
`
`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.
`
`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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Page 6
`
`Claim 1—4, 13, 14—16is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Wesemann US 20120091818 in view of Jansen US 20080303351 A1
`
`Regarding claim 1;
`
`Wesemann teaches
`
`a first arm extending in a first direction (fig 5, 11 first arm 4);
`
`a second arm supported by the first arm (fig 5, 11 second arm 2); and
`
`wherein the first arm includes a first power transmission antenna (fig 5, 11 interface 5
`
`with coil 21),
`
`the second arm includes a first power reception antenna (para 0069, fig 5, 11 interface
`
`7 with coil 23),
`
`the first power transmission antenna supplies electric power to the first power
`
`reception antenna wirelessly (fig 5, 11 wireless power transfer), and
`
`the first power reception antenna supplies the supplied electric power to a load
`
`electrically connected to the first power reception antenna (fig 8 load attached to bar/arm 2).
`
`Wesemann doesn’t teach
`
`a first linear actuator that is provided in the first arm or the second arm and moves the
`
`second arm along the first direction with respect to the first arm.
`
`Jansen teaches
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Page 7
`
`a first linear actuator ( para 0049 linear actuator in machine) that is provided in the
`
`first arm or the second arm and moves the second arm along the first direction with respect to
`
`the first arm (Para 0052 for movement/sliadable along core 20 direction).
`
`In light of such teachings it would have been obvious to one skill in the art at the time of
`
`filing to modify Wesemann with an actuator as taught byJansen to slide the second arm in the
`
`direction ofthe first arm.
`
`Regarding claim 13;
`
`Wesemann teaches
`
`an arm extending in a first direction (fig 5, 11 first arm 2 in y direction);
`
`a support extending in a second direction that is different from the first direction and
`
`supporting the arm (fig 5, 11 support with interface 5 in X direction); and
`
`wherein the support includes a power transmission antenna (fig 5, 11 interface 5 with
`
`coil 21),
`
`the arm includes a power reception antenna (para 0069, fig 5, 11 interface 7 with coil
`
`23), and
`
`the power transmission antenna supplies electric power to the power reception
`
`antenna wirelessly (wireless power transfer coil 21 t023), and
`
`the power reception antenna supplies the supplied electric power to a load electrically
`
`connected to the power reception antenna. (fig 8 load attached to bar/arm 2).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Wesemann doesn’t teach
`
`Page 8
`
`a linear actuator that is provided in at least either the support or the arm and moves the
`
`arm along the second direction.
`
`Jansen teaches
`
`a linear actuator (para 0049 linear actuator in machine) that is provided in at least
`
`either the support or the arm and moves the arm along the second direction (Para 0052 for
`
`movement/sliadable along core 20 direction fig 1).
`
`In light of such teachings it would have been obvious to one skill in the art at the time of
`
`filing to modify Wesemann with an actuator as taught by Jansen to slide the second arm in the
`
`direction ofthe first arm.
`
`Regarding claim 2;
`
`Wesemann in view of Jansen teaches all claim limitation with respect to claim 1 and
`
`teaches the first power transmission antenna includes a first power transmission coil (fig 5
`
`interface 5 with coil 21), the first power reception antenna includes a first power reception coil
`
`(fig 7 interface 5 with coil 23), and the first power transmission coil is electromagnetically
`
`coupled to the first power reception a coil and supplies the electric power to the first power
`
`reception coil wirelessly (wireless power transfer)
`
`Regarding claim 3;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Page 9
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen teaches all claim limitation with respect to claim 2 and
`
`teaches the first power transmission coil has a first power transmission surface surrounded by
`
`an outside edge of the first power transmission coil (fig 5 coil 5 surface with edge), the first
`
`power reception coil has a first power reception surface surrounded by an outside edge of the
`
`first power reception coil (fig 5 coil 7 surface with edge), and the first power transmission
`
`surface and the first power reception surface are parallel to a direction of a load applied to the
`
`second arm (fig 5 coils are parallel to a direction of a load applied to the second arm 2)
`
`Regarding claim 4;
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen teaches all claim limitation with respect to claim 1 and
`
`teaches a support extending in a second direction that is different from the first direction and
`
`supporting the first arm (fig 5 support 1c/ 1b extending in up/ down direction)
`
`Regarding claim 14;
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen teaches all claim limitation with respect to claim 13 and
`
`teaches the first power transmission antenna includes a first power transmission coil (fig 5
`
`interface 5 with coil 21), the first power reception antenna includes a first power reception coil
`
`(fig 7 interface 5 with coil 23), and the first power transmission coil is electromagnetically
`
`coupled to the first power reception a coil and supplies the electric power to the first power
`
`reception coil wirelessly (wireless power transfer)
`
`Regarding claim 15;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Page 10
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen teaches all claim limitation with respect to claim 14 and
`
`teaches the first power transmission coil has a first power transmission surface surrounded by
`
`an outside edge of the first power transmission coil (fig 5 coil 5 surface with edge), the first
`
`power reception coil has a first power reception surface surrounded by an outside edge of the
`
`first power reception coil (fig 5 coil 7 surface with edge), and the first power transmission
`
`surface and the first power reception surface are parallel to a direction of a load applied to the
`
`arm (fig 5 coils are parallel to a direction of a load applied to the second arm 2)
`
`Regarding claim 16;
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen teaches all claim limitation with respect to claim 13 and
`
`teaches the support further includes an inverter circuit connected to the power
`
`transmission antenna (fig 8 inverter), and the arm further includes a rectifier circuit connected
`
`between the power reception antenna and the load (fig 8).
`
`Claim 12, 17—19is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Wesemann US 20120091818 in view of Jansen US 20080303351 A1 in view of Sugino US
`
`20140091635 Al
`
`Regarding claim 12/ 19;
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen teaches all claim limitation with respect to claim 1, 13.
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen doesn’t teach an end effector disposed at a distal end ofthe
`
`second arm, wherein the load is the end effector.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Page 11
`
`Sugino teaches an end effector disposed at a distal end of the second arm, wherein the load is
`
`the end effector (para 0062 fig 10 load 45 at distal end of arm 62)
`
`In light of such teachings it would have been obvious design choice to one skill in the art
`
`at the time of filing to have the load of Wesemann in view ofJansen to be at a distal end ofthe
`
`arm as taught by Sugino to convert electric energy into mechanical energy.
`
`Regarding claim 17;
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen teaches all claim limitation with respect to claim 13.
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen doesn’t teach a first rotating mechanism that rotates the
`
`support about an axis parallel to the second direction.
`
`Sugino teaches a first rotating mechanism that rotates the support about an axis parallel
`
`to the second direction (para 136 184).
`
`In light of such teachings it would have been obvious design choice to one skill in the art
`
`at the time of filing to have a rotating mechanism for Wesemann in view ofJansen as taught by
`
`Sugino to have clockwise and counterclockwise rotation.
`
`Regarding claim 18;
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen teaches all claim limitation with respect to claim 13.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/405,531
`Art Unit: 2836
`
`Page 12
`
`Wesemann in view ofJansen doesn’t teach a second rotating mechanism that rotates
`
`the arm about at least either an axis parallel to the second direction or an axis perpendicular to
`
`both the first and second directions.
`
`Sugino teaches a rotating mechanism (para 136 184).
`
`In light of such teachings it would have been obvious design choice to one skill in the art
`
`at the time of filing to have a rotating mechanism for Wesemann in view ofJansen as taught by
`
`Sugino to have clockwise and counterclockwise rotation.
`
`Allowable Subject Matter
`
`Claim 5—11 is/ are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would
`
`be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations ofthe base claim
`
`and any intervening claims.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to EMMANUEL DOMINIQUE whose telephone number is (571)272—
`
`0683. The examiner can normally be reached on M—F 10 AM to 7PM.
`
`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.
`
`