Appeal 2007-2909
Application 10/622,063
1 3. The Examiner found that Ishida describes (Fig. 1) a stage (items 5,
2 6, and 8), an elevator (items 4a and 10), a pen tip (nozzle 1), a dispenser
3 (syringe 2 and nozzle support 12) and a digital controller (items 14, 16, 17
4 and 18) (Final Rejection 2 and Answer 4).
5 4. The Examiner found that Ishida does not describe that the pen is
6 rotatably mounted to the elevator, or that the stage permits translation
7 generally in a plane and rotation about an axis generally parallel to the plane
8 as recited in the claims (Final Rejection 2 and Answer 4).
9 Barrey
10 5. The Examiner relied on Barrey as describing an end effector
11 gripping tool 16 for permitting translation generally in a plane and rotation
12 about an axis generally parallel to the plane as claimed (Final Rejection 3-4
13 and Answer 4 and 6).
14 6. Specifically, the Examiner found that Barrey describes a multi-axis
15 robot structure that allows for the application of sealant to a surface that lies
16 in two or more dimensional planes, directing attention to Barrey, col. 2, lines
17 54-57 (Final Rejection 3 and Answer 4).
18 7. Barrey describes the following:
19 As will be discussed in greater detail below, six of the seven
20 axial control ports associated with robot controller 18 are used
21 for controlling the six axes of motion of the robotic manipulator
22 14. Thus, in the present implementation, all six axes of motion
23 provided by the robotic manipulator 14 are utilized so that the
24 end effector or gripping tool 16 has a complete range of motion
25 within a three-dimensional coordinate space. As will be
26 appreciated, this complete range of motion becomes important
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013