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 .
Status
This Office Action is in response to the Amendments and Arguments filed 10 October 2025. As directed by applicant, no claims have been further amended, added or cancelled. Thus, claims 1-6, 8, 11, and 14-18 are now pending in this action. This is a Final Office Action.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a holding apparatus” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Here, the “holding apparatus” can be the “clamping region of the tool holder” and its equivalents (¶0032).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 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.
[Note: Strikethrough indicates that the limitations is not taught by the reference.]
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haimer ‘059 (U.S. Patent 8,963,059) in view of Shigefuji, (U.S. Patent 6,163,734), and Haimer ‘386 (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/ 0277386, herein after “Haimer ‘386”).
Regarding claim 1, Haimer ‘059 discloses an induction coil unit ( Haimer ‘059, Abstract, “a device for inductively clamping and unclamping a tool shaft of a tool”) for heating a freely-terminating sleeve portion of a tool holder having a receiving opening (Haimer, receiving bore hole 5, fig. 1, column 2 line 24) formed therein for a shank of a rotary tool (shaft 9) , in which the freely-terminating sleeve portion holds the shank of the rotary tool seated in the receiving opening in a press fit and releases the rotary tool upon heating (Haimer ‘059, column 6 lines 29-36; “The exterior diameter of the shaft 9 is then slightly larger than the free nominal diameter of the receiver bore hole 5, so that the shaft 9, when it is inserted in the bore hole 5, is supported in the clamping sleeve 3 through a friction locking press fit for transferring the operating torque. In order to be able to insert the tool shaft 9 into the tool holder 1 and in order to be able to also remove it, the clamping sleeve 3 is expanded through heating.), the induction coil unit comprising:
a holding apparatus (clamping sleeve 3, column 6 lines 42 et seq.) for holding the tool holder during a heating operation;
a coil configuration (Haimer ‘059, “induction coil” 13 and “coil units” 14a and 14b which together make 15, within “coils housings” 17a, and 17b, figs. 1 and 2) enclosing the freely-terminating sleeve portion during the heating operation, said coil configuration having an adjustable geometry (column 6 line 63 – column 7 line 3, adjustment of the two coil units 14a a, 14b is facilitated along the rotation axis 7) ;
a magnetic flux concentrator configuration (sleeve shaped concentrators, 19a and 19b, concentrator ring 21) disposed on a side of said coil configuration adjacent a free end of the freely-terminating sleeve portion, said magnetic flux concentrator configuration being disposed at least near the free end of the freely-terminating sleeve portion of the tool holder and being made of a magnetic material that is substantially electrically non-conductive (column 7 lines 21-22 “[concentrators are] made from magnetically conductive but electrically nonconductive material, like e.g., an oxide ceramic material, in particular ferrite, see Haimer ‘414, U.S. Patent 9,278,414, Column 7 lines 48-50 which teaches that “concentrator elements [] are entirely comprised of magnetically soft, substantially electrically nonconductive material, e.g. ferrite”);
a memory storing data (Haimer ‘059, Column 11 line 62 “[T]he respective geometry and shrink parameters with respect to different shrink fit chucks can either be read in from an external data source or through a suitable scanner which reads from a respective data carrier on the shrink fit chuck and thus facilitates the respective adjustment and control of the two motors”) of a type of tool holder that is held by said holding apparatus, based on the coding obtained from said detector, and storing data related to at least one property of the tool holder held by said holding apparatus, the at least one property being selected from the group consisting of an outer dimension, a wall thickness, and an axial extension of the tool holder (Haimer ‘058, column 11 line 58, “As a consequence of the separate adjustability of the diameter and the length of the distance coil of the coil units, simple controllability is provided for fully operated operations.);
a controller (Haimer, ‘059, column 5 lines 30-51, “automated operations…can be configured with a data carrier… associated through digital image processing, with laser scanners, distance sensors and similar… The power supply of the drive unit can be turned off and on through a control signal together with the shrink electronics”) connected to said memory and, being in data communication, respectively, with said memory to obtain the data relating to the at least one property of the tool holder, and with said at least one actuator to direct an adaptation of the at least one operating parameter, said controller being configured to direct the adaptation of the at least one operating parameter by adjusting the geometry of said coil configuration based on the at least one property of the tool holder detected by said at least one detector (Haimer ‘059, column 10 lines 47-52, “The slanted support of the slides and thus the slanted position of the concentrator elements received on the inside of the slides can result in that the concentrator elements are not only moved radially in a direction towards the rotation axis 7, but also with an additional axial component in a direction towards the clamping sleeve 3 into their operating position”).
Haimer ‘059 does not disclose “at least one detector for automatically detecting a coding furnished on the tool holder, said coding being selected from the group consisting of an optical coding, a textural marking, an RFID chip, and a mechanical marking; at least one actuator for adapting at least one operating parameter of the heating operation, said actuator being configured to adjust the geometry of said coil configuration and to adjust an AC voltage and /or frequency of the AC voltage of an electrical supply to said coil configuration”.
However, Shigefuji teaches a coding furnished on the tool holder, said coding being selected from the group consisting of an optical coding, a textural marking, an RFID chip, and a mechanical marking (Shigefuji, column 1, lines 34-55, “ During the operation of the press, desired upper and lower tools are selected and taken out from the magazine on the basis of such tool-pair information, so that the tools are changed with old tools on the punch press. The tool-pair information includes tool shape information, tool size information and tool clearance information. The tool information includes a tool manufacturing number and a tool manufacturing date. Such information may be represented by bar codes that is provided on the surface of the tools to be read by a bar code scanner.). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Haimer ‘059 with the teachings of Shigefuji, to have optical markings for inserting the tool into the holder and knowing its identity, and thus knowing the required insertion configuration and parameters for quick changes, and this recognizing that Haimer ‘058 is very interested in determining the geometry and configuration of its tool and chuck, and it does this with scanners of its own, so this would be a beneficial modification (Haimer ‘059, column 12 lines 1-7, “geometric data of the chuck”; column 5 lines 30-35, “the respective geometry data of a chuck or a clamping sleeve of a tool holder are determined automatically for a fully automated shrinking process, wherein the chuck or the tool holder can be configured with a respective data carrier.” Wherein, “outer dimension, a wall thickness, and an axial extension” are all “geometry data” of the tool holder or the chuck) having the tool be identified quickly and easily with a code.
And while Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji teaches the above limitation, it still does not teach at least one actuator for adapting at least one operating parameter of the heating operation, said actuator being configured to adjust the geometry of said coil configuration and to adjust an AC voltage and /or frequency of the AC voltage of an electrical supply to said coil configuration”.
However, Haimer ‘386 teaches at least one actuator (Haimer ‘386, AC Generator, 19a) for adapting at least one operating parameter of the heating operation (Haimer ‘386, ¶0054), said actuator being configured to adjust the geometry of said coil configuration and to adjust an AC voltage and /or frequency of the AC voltage of an electrical supply to said coil configuration (Haimer ‘386, at least claim 22.” the coil units are connected to an AC generator, whose current and/or power on duration and/or voltage is adjustable, and which controls at least one positioning drive depending on the setting”.).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji with the teachings of Haimer ‘386, to have at least one operating parameter be adjusted and adjusting the AC voltage and/or the frequency, to adjust the coil, in order to cause effective holding of the tool, depending on geometry and/or size and or desired grip of the tool.
Regarding claim 2, Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji and Haimer ‘386 teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as above, and further teaches wherein said actuator is adapted to adjust a positioning of said coil configuration during the heating operation (Haimer ‘059, column 5 lines 35-40, “the coil can be automatically adjusted”; column 12 lines 3-6).
Regarding claim 3, Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji and Haimer ‘386 teaches all the limitations of claim 2, as above, and further teaches wherein said actuator has a movable stop means for said coil configuration (Haimer ’059, stop bars 54, column 9 line 62 to column 10 line 3).
Regarding claim 4, Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji and Haimer ‘386 teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as above, and further teaches wherein said actuator is adapted to adjust a positioning of said magnetic flux concentrator configuration in a tool holder's axial and/or radial direction during the heating operation (Haimer ‘059, column 5 lines 35-40, “the coil can be automatically adjusted”; column 12 lines 3-6; Of particular note is that the concentrators are also movable in order to best heat up the device in order to achieve shrink locking; Abstract, “concentrator elements are movable relative to the rotational axis with a radial and an axial component).
Regarding claim 11, Haimer '059 in view of Shigefuji, and Haimer '386 teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as above, and further teaches a device wherein said actuator is adapted to adjust a positioning of said coil configuration along an axial direction of the tool holder during the heating operation (Haimer ‘059, column 5 lines 35-40, “the coil can be automatically adjusted”; column 12 lines 3-6; column 3 lines 25-29).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Haimer ‘059 (U.S. Patent 8,963,059) and in view of Shigefuji, (U.S. Patent 6,163,734) and Haimer ‘386 (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/ 0277386) and further in view of Pfau (U.S. Patent Application 2006/ 0163245).
Regarding claim 5, Haimer '059 in view of Shigefuji and Haimer '386 teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as above, but does not further teach an apparatus comprising: at least one suction device for vapor produced during heating; and/or a sealing element for cooling media, said actuator is adapted to adjust a positioning of said at least one suction device and/or said at least one sealing - 20 -HAI-0094 element for cooling media in a tool holder's axial and/or radial direction during the heating operation. However, Pfau teaches a suction device to get rid of vapor or gases produced by the holder during the heating process that arise from the holder (Pfau, Abstract, gas suction device for evacuating gases, fig. 1). The advantage would be to ensure that the workspace remains clean and not offensive while inserting the tools, thus it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify Haimer ‘059 and Haimer ‘386 with Pfau, to have a suction device to capture the escaping gases to make for a more pleasant working environment (Pfau, ¶0036-0038, prevents gases “emerg[ing] into surroundings”).
Claims 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Haimer ‘059 (U.S. Patent 8,963,059) in view of Shigefuji (WIPO Patent Publication WO2004091847A2, attached, hereinafter “Shigefuji”) and Haimer ‘386 (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/ 0277386) and further in view of Haimer ‘069 (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/ 0113069) and as evidenced by Pankratz (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/ 0041455).
Regarding claim 6, Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji and Haimer ‘386 teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as above, and but does not further teach explicitly: said coil configuration has a switchable and/or reversible-polarity winding region. However, Haimer ‘069 teaches that “said coil configuration has a reversible-polarity winding region”, meaning that the windings support polarity reversal (Haimer ‘069 ¶0099, “the coils are all wound in the same sense with respect to the radial direction, with the polarity of their connections ensuring that the magnetic flux direction alternates in the circumferential direction, as has been explained with reference to FIG. 9.”, Alternating current causes polarity reversal, as is evidenced by Pankratz, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/ 0041455, “Electrically conductive materials can be heated by induction This occurs by placing an electrically conductive material in a magnetic field generated by an induction coil. The magnetic field is hereby generated by an alternating current which results in a polarity reversal of the magnetic field at the frequency of the alternating current”).). Thus it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji and Haimer ‘386 with Haimer ‘069 (and as evidenced by Pankratz), to support the AC current going through the coils, allowing for reversal of the polarity or adjusting power which effectuates heating of the holder
Regarding claim 14, Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji, Haimer ‘386 and Haimer ‘069 and as evidenced by Pankratz teaches all the limitations of claim 6, as above, and further discloses said actuator is adapted to adjust a diameter and/or an axial distance between said winding regions (Haimer ‘059, column 3 line 45) and/or to switch said winding regions of said coil configuration on or off (Haimer ‘059, column 5 lien 45, “on or off”) and/or to reverse a polarity of the winding regions.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious Haimer ‘059 (U.S. Patent 8,963,059) in view of Shigefuji (WIPO Patent Publication WO2004091847A2, attached, hereinafter “Shigefuji”) and Haimer ‘386 (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/ 0277386) and further in view of Haimer ‘515 (German Patent Publication DE102016206515A1; previously attached, with Machine English Translation of specification).
Regarding claim 8, Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji and Haimer ‘386 teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as above, but does not further teach wherein said detector is configured for at least one of the following: to optically determine the at least one property of the tool holder held by said holding apparatus based on a shape thereof,
to determine the at least one property of the tool holder held by said holding apparatus based on a weight thereof;
to determine the at least one property of the tool holder held by said holding apparatus based on magnetic properties thereof;
to determine the at least one property of the tool holder held by said holding apparatus based on haptic sensing; or
to determine the at least one property of the tool holder held by said holding apparatus based on ultrasonic imaging.
Now, Haimer ‘059 teaches about different size chuck and holder and he asserts that with different sensor, you can work with different sizes and shapes of holders and coils (Haimer ‘059, column 5 lines 30 -40, “the geometry data of a chuck or a clamping sleeve of a tool holder are determined” by… “digital image processing, laser scanners, distance sensors and similar”; getting a “digital image” based off the lasers and sensors would be getting a parameter or property “based on shape”). Haimer ‘515 teaches an optical sensor for imaging the shape of a tool or even using ultra-sonic waves (Haimer ‘515, ¶0035, “optical detection arrangement” “The image from the camera can …be displayed…so that the operator can use the camera image to examine the tool”; or ¶0010, contactless detection using transmitted light or ultrasonic waves is possible”). Given the teaching of Haimer ‘059 of multiple types of sensors (including the term “and similar”) for imaging (that would be “based on a shape”) it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to substitute the teachings of Haimer ‘515 into the invention of Haimer ‘059 in view of the secondary references, to modify the invention to have the claimed sensing, either optical or ultrasonic (or other), because the substitution of one known method of sensing for another would have yielded predictable results of assessing the shape or position of the tool to ensure that the tool holder is appropriately configured.
Claims 15, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Haimer ‘059 (U.S. Patent 8,963,059) in view of Shigefuji, (U.S. Patent 6,163,734).
Regarding claim 15, Haimer ‘059 discloses induction coil unit (Haimer ‘059, Abstract, “a device for inductively clamping and unclamping a tool shaft of a tool”) for heating a freely-terminating sleeve portion of a tool holder having a receiving opening (Haimer, receiving bore hole 5, fig. 1, column 2 line 24) formed therein for a shank of a rotary tool (shaft 9), in which the freely-terminating sleeve portion holds the shank of the rotary tool seated in the receiving opening in a press fit and releases the rotary tool upon heating (Haimer ‘059, column 6 lines 29-36; “The exterior diameter of the shaft 9 is then slightly larger than the free nominal diameter of the receiver bore hole 5, so that the shaft 9, when it is inserted in the bore hole 5, is supported in the clamping sleeve 3 through a friction locking press fit for transferring the operating torque. In order to be able to insert the tool shaft 9 into the tool holder 1 and in order to be able to also remove it, the clamping sleeve 3 is expanded through heating.), the induction coil unit comprising:
a holding apparatus (clamping sleeve 3, column 6 lines 42 et seq.) for holding the tool holder during a heating operation;
a coil configuration (Haimer ‘059, “induction coil” 13 and “coil units” 14a and 14b which together make 15, within “coils housings” 17a, and 17b, figs. 1 and 2) enclosing the freely-terminating sleeve portion during the heating operation, said coil configuration having an adjustable geometry (column 6 line 63 – column 7 line 3, adjustment of the two coil units 14a a, 14b is facilitated along the rotation axis 7);
a magnetic flux concentrator configuration (sleeve shaped concentrators, 19a and 19b, concentrator ring 21) disposed on a side of said coil configuration adjacent a free end of the freely-terminating sleeve portion, said magnetic flux concentrator configuration being disposed at least near the free end of the freely-terminating sleeve portion of the tool holder and being made of a magnetic material that is substantially electrically non-conductive (Haimer ‘059, column 7 lines 21-22 “[concentrators are] made from magnetically conductive but electrically nonconductive material, like e.g., an oxide ceramic material, in particular ferrite, see Haimer ‘414, U.S. Patent 9,278,414, Column 7 lines 48-50 which teaches that “concentrator elements [] are entirely comprised of magnetically soft, substantially electrically nonconductive material, e.g. ferrite”);;
at least one actuator for adapting at least one operating parameter of the heating operation, said actuator being configured to adjust the geometry of said coil configuration (Haimer ‘059, column 5 lines 23-26, “and the positional adjustment of the coil units of the induction coil assembly separately adjustable relative to one another, which in particular provides controllable adjustment options for particular applications”);
a controller (Haimer, ‘059, column 5 lines 30-51, “automated operations…can be configured with a data carrier… associated through digital image processing, with laser scanners, distance sensors and similar… and power supply can be turned off and on through… the shrink electronics”) being in data communication, respectively, with said at least one detector (column 5 lines 36-37; “associated through digital image processing, laser scanners, distance sensors and similar”) to obtain data relating to the tool holder, and with said at least one actuator to direct an adaptation of the at least one operating parameter, said controller being configured to direct the adaptation of the at least one operating parameter by adjusting the geometry of said coil configuration based on the at least one property of the tool holder detected by said at least one detector (adjusted based on one of “digital image processing, laser scanners, distance sensors and similar”); and
a memory connected to said controller, said memory storing data that enable said controller to determine a type of tool holder that is held by said holding apparatus (Haimer ‘059, “(Haimer ‘059, Column 11 line 62 “[T]he respective geometry and shrink parameters with respect to different shrink fit chucks can either be read in from an external data source or through a suitable scanner which reads from a respective data carrier on the shrink fit chuck and thus facilitates the respective adjustment and control of the two motors”),
.
Haimer ‘059 is silent regarding at least one detector for automatically detecting “a coding furnished on the tool holder held by said holding apparatus in order to determine at least one property of the tool holder, the coding being an optical coding”, and the memory storing data that enables the controller to determine a type of tool holder “based on information obtained from the detector”.
However, Haimer ‘059 already teaches about different size chuck and holder and he asserts that with different sensors, you can work with different sizes and shapes of holders and coils (Haimer ‘059, column 12 lines 1-8, “The geometric data of the chuck can thus be automatically determined in different manners e.g., through digital image processing, laser scanners and distance sensors through which the shrinking parameters can automatically be assigned according to the size of the shrink fit chuck and the coil can be automatically adjusted with respect to its axial length. A slide can be used for both motors for the intended space saving and compact configuration.”) and a detector (column 11 line 62 - column 12 line 7). However, Shigefuji teaches “a coding furnished on the tool holder held by said holding apparatus in order to determine at least one property of the tool holder, the coding being an optical coding”, (Shigefuji, column 1, lines 34-55, “ During the operation of the press, desired upper and lower tools are selected and taken out from the magazine on the basis of such tool-pair information, so that the tools are changed with old tools on the punch press. The tool-pair information includes tool shape information, tool size information and tool clearance information. The tool information includes a tool manufacturing number and a tool manufacturing date. Such information may be represented by bar codes that is provided on the surface of the tools to be read by a bar code scanner. A bar code is an optical coding, i.e. coding read by optics). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Haimer ‘059 with the teachings of Shigefuji, to have optical markings for inserting the tool into the holder and knowing its identity, and thus knowing the required insertion configuration and parameters for quick changes, and this recognizing that Haimer ‘058 is very interested in determining the geometry and configuration of its tool and chuck, and it does this with scanners of its own, so this would be a beneficial modification (Haimer ‘059, column 12 lines 1-7, “geometric data of the chuck”; column 5 lines 30-35, “the respective geometry data of a chuck or a clamping sleeve of a tool holder are determined automatically for a fully automated shrinking process, wherein the chuck or the tool holder can be configured with a respective data carrier.” Wherein, “outer dimension, a wall thickness, and an axial extension” are all “geometry data” of the tool holder or the chuck) having the tool be identified quickly and easily with a code, and it would be helpful to access the memory and to determine a property of the tool holder “based on the information from the detector” so it is for quick and easy identification and configuration.
Regarding claim 16, Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji, teach all the limitations of claim 15, as above, and further teaches wherein the coding is selected from the group consisting of an optical coding, an inscription, a radio frequency identification chip and a mechanical marking (Shigefuji, id. optical coding, barcode).
Regarding claim 17, Haimer ‘059 discloses an induction coil unit ( Haimer ‘059, Abstract, “a device for inductively clamping and unclamping a tool shaft of a tool”) for heating a freely-terminating sleeve portion of a tool holder having a receiving opening (Haimer, receiving bore hole 5, fig. 1, column 2 line 24) formed therein for a shank of a rotary tool (shaft 9) , in which the freely-terminating sleeve portion holds the shank of the rotary tool seated in the receiving opening in a press fit and releases the rotary tool upon heating (Haimer ‘059, column 6 lines 29-36; “The exterior diameter of the shaft 9 is then slightly larger than the free nominal diameter of the receiver bore hole 5, so that the shaft 9, when it is inserted in the bore hole 5, is supported in the clamping sleeve 3 through a friction locking press fit for transferring the operating torque. In order to be able to insert the tool shaft 9 into the tool holder 1 and in order to be able to also remove it, the clamping sleeve 3 is expanded through heating.), the induction coil unit comprising:
a holding apparatus (clamping sleeve 3, column 6 lines 42 et seq.) for holding the tool holder during a heating operation;
a coil configuration (Haimer ‘059, “induction coil” 13 and “coil units” 14a and 14b which together make 15, within “coils housings” 17a, and 17b, figs. 1 and 2) enclosing the freely-terminating sleeve portion during the heating operation, said coil configuration having an adjustable geometry (column 6 line 63 – column 7 line 3, adjustment of the two coil units 14a a, 14b is facilitated along the rotation axis 7) ;
a magnetic flux concentrator configuration (sleeve shaped concentrators, 19a and 19b, concentrator ring 21) disposed on a side of said coil configuration adjacent a free end of the freely-terminating sleeve portion, said magnetic flux concentrator configuration being disposed at least near the free end of the freely-terminating sleeve portion of the tool holder and being made of a magnetic material that is substantially electrically non-conductive (column 7 lines 21-22 “[concentrators are] made from magnetically conductive but electrically nonconductive material, like e.g., an oxide ceramic material, in particular ferrite, see Haimer ‘414, U.S. Patent 9,278,414, Column 7 lines 48-50 which teaches that “concentrator elements [] are entirely comprised of magnetically soft, substantially electrically nonconductive material, e.g. ferrite”);
at least one actuator (element 70 with motors 72 & 74; column 11 line 40) for adapting at least one operating parameter of the heating operation, said actuator being configured to adjust the geometry of said coil configuration (Haimer ‘059, column 5 lines 23-26, “and the positional adjustment of the coil units of the induction coil assembly separately adjustable relative to one another, which in particular provides controllable adjustment options for particular applications”; column 11 line 39, adjusting the coil units relative to one another;. column 5 lines 35-40, “the coil can be automatically adjusted”; column 12 lines 3-6) and to adjust a positioning of said coil configuration during the heating operation (Haimer ‘059, “column 3 lines 13-14, the position of the coil units can be adjustable or alignable”; and said actuator having a movable stop means for said coil configuration(Haimer ‘’059, stop bars 54, column 9 line 62 to column 10 line 3).
a controller (Haimer, ‘059, column 5 lines 30-51, “automated operations…can be configured with a data carrier… associated through digital image processing, with laser scanners, distance sensors and similar… and power supply can be turned off and on through… the shrink electronics”), being in data communication, respectively, with said at least one detector to obtain data relating to the tool holder, and with said at least one actuator to direct an adaptation of the at least one operating parameter, said controller being configured to direct the adaptation of the at least one operating parameter by adjusting the geometry of said coil configuration based on the at least one property of the tool holder detected by said at least one detector.
Haimer ‘059 does not disclose at least one detector for automatically detecting a coding furnished on the tool holder, said coding being selected from the group consisting of an optical coding, a textual marking, an RFID chip, and a mechanical marking and relating to at least one property of the tool holder held by said holding apparatus, the at least one property being selected from the group consisting of an outer dimension, a wall thickness, and an axial extension of the tool holder.
However, Shigefuji, directed to changing tools for working metal, teaches at least one detector for automatically detecting a coding furnished on the tool holder, said coding being selected from the group consisting of an optical coding, a textual marking, an RFID chip, and a mechanical marking and relating to at least one property of the tool holder held by said holding apparatus, the at least one property being selected from the group consisting of an outer dimension, a wall thickness, and an axial extension of the tool holder (Shigefuji, column 1, lines 34-55, “ During the operation of the press, desired upper and lower tools are selected and taken out from the magazine on the basis of such tool-pair information, so that the tools are changed with old tools on the punch press. The tool-pair includes tool shape information, tool size information and tool clearance information. The tool information includes a tool manufacturing number and a tool manufacturing date. Such information may be represented by bar codes that is provided on the surface of the tools to be read by a bar code scanner”. A bar code is an optical coding, i.e. coding read by optics). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Haimer ‘059 with the teachings of Shigefuji and Carberry, to have optical markings for inserting the tool into the holder and knowing its identity, and thus knowing the required insertion configuration and parameters for quick changes, and this recognizing that Haimer ‘058 is very interested in determining the geometry and configuration of its tool and chuck, and it does this with scanners of its own, so this would be a beneficial modification (Haimer ‘059, column 11 line 62 - column 12 lines 7, “geometric data of the chuck”; column 5 lines 30-35, “the respective geometry data of a chuck or a clamping sleeve of a tool holder are determined automatically for a fully automated shrinking process, wherein the chuck or the tool holder can be configured with a respective data carrier.” Wherein, “outer dimension, a wall thickness, and an axial extension” are all “geometry data” of the tool holder or the chuck) having the tool be identified quickly and easily with a code
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Haimer ‘059 (U.S. Patent 8,963,059) in view of Shigefuji (WIPO Patent Publication WO2004091847A2, attached, hereinafter “Shigefuji”) and further in view of Pfau (U.S. Patent Application 2006/ 0163245).
Regarding claim 18, Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji teaches all the limitations of claim 17, as above, but does not further teach an apparatus comprising: at least one suction device for vapor produced during heating and/or a sealing element for cooling media, said actuator is adapted to adjust a positioning of said at least one suction device and/or said at least one sealing - 20 -HAI-0094 element for cooling media in a tool holder's axial and/or radial direction during the heating operation. However, Pfau teaches a suction device to get rid of vapor or gases produced by the holder during the heating process that arise from the holder (Pfau, Abstract, gas suction device for evacuating gases, fig. 1). The advantage would be to ensure that the workspace remains clean and not offensive while inserting the tools, thus it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify Haimer ‘059 in view of Shigefuji with Pfau, to have a suction device to capture the escaping gases to make for a more pleasant working environment (Pfau, ¶0036-0038, prevents gases “emerg[ing] into surroundings”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, dated 10 October 2025, with respect to the independent claim(s) have been considered but not persuasive.
With regard to the §112(f) claim interpretation issue, the claim itself does not provide sufficient structure for affecting the means- plus- function limitation. Therefore, the limitation’s interpretation under §112(f) is appropriate.
Regarding the §103 rejection, Applicant argues that the combination with Shigefuji is improper.
Shigefuji is combined to teach the limitation “a coding furnished on the tool holder, said coding being selected from the group consisting of an optical coding, a textural marking, an RFID chip, and a mechanical marking”. Applicant argues that the combination is improper, and that Shigefuji pertains to punch presses and the tool identification is to avoid a mismatch between the parts (Remarks, p. 8-9). Applicant argues that there would be no need for an “actuator” in the combination as Shigefuji just teaches identifying to match tools not adjust a parameter (Remarks, p. 9). However, as noted, Haimer ‘059 already teaches adjusting a parameter automatically via different ways (Haimer ‘059, column 11 line 62 through column 12 line 8). And Haimer ‘059’s specification even teaches how this data may be read into the device (id.). Shigefuji is just combined to supplement that other well-known methods may be used to read in data, not that the entire specification of Shigefuji is being combined (i.e. RFID, etc.). As well, Haimer ‘059 already teaches an actuator to adjust parameters, (Haimer ‘059, column 5 lines 23-26) but Haimer ‘386 is specifically combined to demonstrate that even the change in current/voltage is conventional (Haimer ‘386, ¶0054), and, again, this just supplements the method of Haimer ‘059 with a further conventional method of achieving the desired result, and so is thus obvious. It is noted that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
And briefly, regarding claim 3, the stop is movable, as the device is movable and also the “at least some of the slides include a stop bar” indicating that this is something that may be configurable, (Haimer ‘059, column 9 line 62 to column 10 line 13), and thus the claim reads on the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see previously filed forms PTO-892.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAWRENCE H SAMUELS whose telephone number is (571)272-2683. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM M-F.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on 571-270-5569. 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.
/LAWRENCE H SAMUELS/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761