Appeal 2007-2909
Application 10/622,063
1 workpiece about an axis A which lies along a different plane than the X-Y
2 plane, but one that is generally parallel to the X-Y plane.
3 The Examiner found that Barrey describes a stage, e.g., end effector
4 gripping tool 16, which permits translation generally in a plane. The
5 Examiner did not specifically find where Barrey describes rotation about an
6 axis that is parallel to the plane defined by the end effector. Rather, the
7 Examiner has taken the position that since Barrey describes a six axis robot,
8 that such robot inherently is capable of being moved in any direction and
9 would be capable of rotating about an axis that is parallel to the plane
10 defined by the end effector gripping tool 16. The Examiner directs our
11 attention to several patents to support the assertion that a six axis robot is
12 capable of being moved in any direction (FFs 5-7 and 14-15).
13 The Examiner has failed to demonstrate that the Barrey end effector
14 permits translation generally in a plane and rotation about an axis generally
15 parallel to the plane. We understand the Examiner to rely on the end
16 effector gripping tool 16 as defining the plane of translation. That is, the end
17 effector gripping tool 16 defines a plane of translation in at least, for
18 example, the Y direction to move or translate the workpiece in towards pen
19 40. Even if the Examiner is correct that the end effector gripping tool 16
20 inherently is capable of being rotated in any direction, such rotation would
21 be about an axis in the same plane of, and not in a plane that is generally
22 parallel to, the plane defined by the end effector gripping tool. We read
23 “generally parallel to” as excluding “the same as.” Also, in the context of
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013