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 .
Response to Amendment
Upon consideration of the amended claims, all previous objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) thereto are hereby withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see pages 7-10 of the Remarks filed 05/01/2025, regarding the Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 7 the Applicant states in reply to the Examiner’s arguments in the outstanding non-final rejection: “the problem to be solved by the present disclosure is made clear by the disclosure itself, and is not one of ‘using strain gauges to measure bending moments in an axial, a vertical, and/or a horizontal direction of a roller’ as posited by the Office.” The Examiner agrees that this is not the main problem to be solved by the present invention; however, the “problem of using strain gauges to measure bending moments” discussed in the non-final rejection (see page 3) was in reference to the limitation “wherein the strain gauges or piezo sensors measure bending moments in an axial, a vertical, and/or a horizontal direction” recited in Claim 1. The combination of Guericke and Aoyama already has strain gauges for measuring generic loads on the rollers which cause deformations, so Nawata is relied upon to teach that bending moments also cause these same deformations and can be measured with strain gauges, and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to use the strain gauges taught by the combination of Guericke and Aoyama to also measure the bending moments.
Applicant further argues on pages 8-9 that Nawata is not reasonably pertinent to the problem of straightening a material of variable curvature, which is the focus of the current invention, and that the rollers of Nawata are not longitudinally offset, as required by the amended Claim 1. Examiner agrees, but as mentioned above, Nawata is solely relied upon for the teaching of using strain gauges, which are already present in the combination of Guericke and Aoyama, to measure bending moments in a metal roller, so the specific use case and configuration of the rollers taught by Nawata are not relevant.
Finally, Applicant argues on page 9: “Guericke does not show or discuss the relative positions of the straightening rollers in the figures.” While it is true that the specification only describes the method using “at least one straightening roller” and the figures only show schematic control diagrams as opposed to the actual straightening machine used, the description of prior art discusses straightening machines having a plurality of straightening rollers “disposed in two rows in a mutually offset manner in at least one straightening plane, [such that] the objects to be straightened are subjected to alternating bends during their passage” (col. 1 lns 16-19), which is understood to be the same “longitudinally offset” arrangement of the claimed invention, and thus it can be implied that the method disclosed by Guericke is performed using this type of configuration.
The rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guericke in view of Aoyama and Nawata is therefore maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guericke et al., hereinafter Guericke (US 6,438,442) in view of Aoyama (JP 2001259737) and Nawata (JP H03128109). For text citations of Aoyama and Nawata, refer to the machine translations provided as Non-Patent Literature with the Office action mailed 07/14/2023.
Regarding Claim 1, Guericke discloses a method for straightening wire or strip pass-through material by at least one dressing device (column 1 lines 5-10), the method comprising: engaging straightening rollers of the dressing device on opposite sides of the pass-through material (column 2 lines 16-18, 30-31; the straightening process is interpreted as engaging straightening rollers of the dressing device), wherein the straightening rollers are longitudinally offset (col. 1 lns 16-19), adjusting some of the straightening rollers automatically and controllably according to a model to control adjustment of the adjustable straightening rollers for straightness of the pass-through material exiting from the dressing device (column 2 lines 13-18, column 3 line 16; process calculation model J is interpreted as the model), wherein the model has been stochastically determined on a basis of entered input data of the pass-through material (column 2 lines 60-67) and on a basis of recorded data of the dressing device and of the pass-through material recorded in the dressing device during passing of the pass-through material through the dressing device (column 2 lines 37-39, column 3 line 20; recorded production data O is interpreted as the recorded data), wherein a position of at least one of the straightening rollers is continuously adapted on the basis of the data recorded during the passing of the pass-through material through the dressing device (column 2 lines 13-18), wherein the recorded data is representative of a target straightness (column 2 line 63; desired quality S for straightness or evenness is interpreted as the target straightness).
Guericke further discloses that the straightening force is recorded during the straightening process (column 3 lines 53-54), but does not explicitly disclose that the recorded data includes a size and direction of forces engaging the straightening rollers on the straightening rollers themselves. Aoyama teaches (Figures 3 and 5) a method for straightening a strip pass-through material (plate material S) by at least one dressing device ([0001] lines 3-4), the method comprising: engaging straightening rollers (upper/lower straightening rolls 6/8) of the dressing device on opposite sides of the pass-through material, wherein the straightening rollers are longitudinally offset (clearly seen in Figure 5), adjusting some of the straightening rollers automatically and controllably according to a model to control adjustment of the adjustable straightening rollers, wherein the model has been determined on a basis of recorded data of the dressing device during passing of the pass-through material through the dressing device, wherein a position of at least one of the straightening rollers is continuously adapted on the basis of the data recorded during the passing of the pass-through material through the dressing device (page 3 lines 48-53; deformation of the lower straightening/backup rolls 8/9 and of the lower roll frame 10 is constantly monitored during the straightening process, and this data is used to determine a necessary amount of force to be applied to upper backup rolls 7 by crowning cylinder 12, which correlates to a position of upper straightening rolls 6, and adjusts accordingly), wherein the recorded data includes a size and a direction of forces engaging the straightening rollers on the straightening rollers themselves (page 3 lines 36-39 and 48-49; load cells detect loads, i.e. sizes of forces, on upper/lower straightening rolls 6/8, and the deformation thereof is monitored, which requires a direction of the forces on the rolls in addition to the size). By monitoring the size and direction of forces on the straightening rollers and using this parameter to adjust the position of the straightening rollers, an overload of the dressing device, which can cause damage to the rollers, can be prevented ([0001] lines 2-4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for straightening wire or strip pass-through material by at least one dressing device disclosed by Guericke such that the recorded data used by the model includes a size and a direction of forces engaging the straightening rollers on the straightening rollers themselves, as taught by Aoyama, in order to prevent damage to the rollers due to an overload on the dressing device.
Further regarding Claim 1, Aoyama teaches (Figures 3 and 5) the forces engaging the straightening rollers (upper/lower straightening rolls 6-8) are measured by strain gauges (strain gauges 41-48) arranged on bearing bolts of the longitudinally offset straightening rollers (page 3 lines 36-39). These strain gauges are used to monitor deformation of the straightening rollers caused by the detected loads (page 3 lines 48-49), but said loads are not explicitly defined as bending moments. In a related field of endeavor, Nawata teaches using strain gauges to measure bending moments in an axial, vertical, and/or horizontal direction of a roller (Abstract lines 5-6), and that said bending moments correlate to deformations in the roller (Abstract lines 6-8; the deviation of the center of web 3 is directly correlated to any deformations in the horizontal rolls 1/2, which are caused by the bending moments thereof). Since it is therefore known that deformations of horizontal metal rollers can be caused by bending moments, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for straightening wire or strip pass-through material by at least one dressing device disclosed by Guericke and modified by Aoyama such that the strain gauges measure bending moments in an axial, a vertical, and/or a horizontal direction, as taught by Nawata, in order to monitor the deformation of the straightening rollers.
Examiner note: regarding the limitation “or piezo sensors”, the use of the conjunction “or” indicates that only one of the strain gauges and the piezo sensors is required in order to meet the limitation of the claim, so the inclusion of piezo sensors is not necessary.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guericke in view of Aoyama and Nawata as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Seidel et al., hereinafter Seidel (US 8,327,918).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Guericke, Aoyama, and Nawata does not disclose that the recorded data includes a temperature of the pass-through material before and after passing through the straightening rollers, but Guericke does state that other process parameters besides those explicitly discussed may be used (column 3 line 66 - column 4 line 2). In a related field of endeavor, Seidel teaches (Figure 1) a method for rolling a metal strip pass-through material (steel strip 1) comprising adjusting some of the rollers (rollers of finishing stands 7) according to a model to control adjustment of the adjustable rollers for a desired quality of the end product, wherein the model has been stochastically determined on a basis of entered input data of the pass-through material (column 3 lines 33-35) and on a basis of recorded data of the rolling apparatus and pass-through material recorded in the rolling apparatus during the passing of the pass-through material through the rolling apparatus (column 6 lines 54-56), wherein a position of at least one of the rollers is continuously adapted on the basis of the recorded data recorded during the passing of the pass-through material through the rolling apparatus (column 5 lines 49-55), the recorded data including a temperature of the pass-through material before and after passing through the straightening rollers (temperature T, shown as being measured before and after rollers of finishing stands 7), wherein the temperature of the pass-through material is measured at an output of each of the straightening rollers (column 5 lines 32-34). Temperature of the strip pass-through material is monitored and used to control the adjustment of the rollers because it is correlated with the material properties of the pass-through material, and is thus must be maintained within certain values in order to ensure desired qualities of the end product can be obtained (column 3 lines 13-16). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for straightening wire or strip pass-through material by at least one dressing device disclosed by Guericke and modified by Aoyama and Nawata such that the recorded data used by the model includes a temperature of the pass-through material, wherein the temperature of the pass-through material is measured at an output of each of the straightening rollers, as taught by Seidel, in order to ensure desirable material properties in the end product.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guericke in view of Aoyama and Nawata as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Moretto et al., hereinafter Moretto (US 8,919,162).
Regarding Claim 4, Guericke discloses that the recorded data includes a position of the pass-through material which is measured and the measured values obtained are entered into the model controlling the adjustment of the adjustable straightening rollers (column 4 lines 2-7; by measuring curvature one is inherently measuring the position of the pass-through material), wherein a measurement of a position of the pass-through material is a measurement of a deviation of the pass-through material from a pass-through axis in or parallel to an adjusting direction of the straightening rollers (column 4 lines 2-5; Guericke measures the curvature of the strip material, which is inherently a measurement of deviation from a given axis in or parallel to the adjusting direction of the straightening rollers), but is silent to where said measurement is occurring. In a related field of endeavor, Moretto teaches (Figures 1-2) a method for rolling a metal strip pass-through material (strip B) comprising adjusting some of the rollers (work rolls 1a/1a’/2a/2a’ and backup rolls 2a/2a’/2b/2b’) according to a model to control adjustment of the adjustable rollers for a desired quality of the end product, wherein the model has been determined on a basis of entered input data of the pass-through material (column 5 lines 47-48; the reference position 6 is interpreted as the entered input data of the pass-through material) and on a basis of recorded data of the rolling apparatus and pass-through material recorded in the rolling apparatus during the passing of the pass-through material through the rolling apparatus (column 5 lines 48-52; the raw signals from sensors 4/5 are interpreted as the recorded data), wherein a position of at least one of the rollers is continuously adapted on the basis of the data recorded during the passing of the pass-through material through the rolling apparatus (column 4 lines 53-58; the tilt of the stands being adjusted is interpreted as the position of at least one of the rollers), the recorded data including a position of the pass-through material subsequent to each of the straightening rollers (column 5 lines 27-34) which is measured and the measured values obtained are entered into the model controlling the adjustment of the adjustable straightening rollers (column 5 lines 47-52, column 6 lines 1-3). Moretto thus teaches that it is known in the art to measure the position of the pass-through material after each roller, and one skilled in the art would understand that this configuration allows for greater control of the rolling process than measuring only after the entire assembly of rollers, as it allows for the effects of each individual roller to be monitored and corrected if need be. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for straightening wire or strip pass-through material by at least one dressing device disclosed by Guericke and modified by Aoyama and Nawata such that the position of the pass-through material is measured subsequent to each of the straightening rollers, as taught by Moretto, in order to ensure greater accuracy.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guericke in view of Aoyama and Nawata as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Kodama et al, hereinafter Kodama (US 6,463,775).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Guericke, Aoyama, and Nawata does not teach that vibrations occurring on the pass-through material are measured. In a related field of endeavor, Kodama teaches a method for rolling a metal strip pass-through material wherein vibrations occurring on the pass-through material passing through are measured (column 5 lines 5-12) and the measured value is entered into a model controlling the adjustment of adjustable rollers (column 7 line 46 - column 8 line 23 describes the process of measuring the vibrations and processing the signals thereof via a model, wherein if a vibration above a certain amplitude is detected an alarm is produced, which would prompt an operator to adjust the rollers). It is advantageous to monitor vibrations occurring on the pass-through material because large-amplitude vibrations can result in the thickness of the pass-through material varying along its length or rupturing of the pass-through material (column 1 lines 23-29). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for straightening wire or strip pass-through material by at least one dressing device disclosed by Guericke and modified by Aoyama and Nawata such that vibrations occurring on the pass-through material passing through are also measured and the measured value is entered into the model controlling the adjustment of the adjustable straightening rollers, as taught by Kodama, in order to prevent varying thickness and rupture of the pass-through material.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guericke in view of Aoyama and Nawata as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang et al, hereinafter Yang (CN 108906918). For text citations of Yang, refer to the machine translation provided as Non-Patent Literature with the Office action mailed 07/14/2023.
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Guericke, Aoyama, and Nawata does not teach that the at least one dressing device comprises two dressing devices in succession, or passing the pass-through material through two dressing devices in succession. Yang teaches (Figures 1-2) a method for straightening wire or strip pass-through material in at least one dressing device (page 2 lines 20-23), wherein the at least one dressing device comprises two dressing devices in succession (first and second work tables 1 and 2), and passing the pass-through material through the two dressing devices in succession (page 3 lines 7-8: taken with the dressing device configuration shown in Figure 1, “with the vertical straightening mechanism and a horizontal straightening mechanism to realize synchronous straightening steel two direction processing” is interpreted as passing the pass-through material through the two dressing devices in succession), wherein one of the two dressing devices has horizontally arranged straightening rollers (horizontal power/pressure wheels 21/22) and another one of the two dressing devices has vertically arranged straightening rollers (vertical power/pressure wheels 12/13). Passing the pass-through material through both horizontal and vertical straightening rollers improves the precision of the straightening process compared to a straightening process in which the pass-through material is only straightened in one direction (page 3 lines 7-10). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for straightening wire or strip pass-through material by at least one dressing device disclosed by Guericke and modified by Aoyama and Nawata such that the at least one dressing device comprises two dressing devices in succession, and passing the pass-through material through the two dressing devices in succession, wherein one of the two dressing devices has horizontally arranged straightening rollers and another one of the two dressing devices has vertically arranged straightening rollers, as taught by Yang, in order to improve the precision of the straightening operation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding Claim 7, prior art fails to teach, alone or in combination, a device to straighten wire or strip pass-through material, comprising two rows of non-driven straightening rollers, wherein a row of the two rows of the straightening rollers acting on the pass-through material has straightening rollers with fixed axes and a further straightening roller of the row subsequently engaging the pass-through material on a same side of the pass-through material is individually adjustable to the pass-through material, wherein an opposite row of the two rows of the straightening rollers has straightening rollers which are jointly adjustable and a further straightening roller of the opposite row subsequently engaging the pass-through material is individually adjustable, together with the other limitations of the claim.
Claims 8 and 9 are allowable by virtue of their dependency on Claim 7.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
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 TERESA A GUTHRIE whose telephone number is (571)270-5042. The examiner can normally be reached M/Tu/Th, 10-6 ET.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached on (571) 270-1477. 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.
/TERESA A GUTHRIE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725