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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/8/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 9/8/2025, with respect to 35 U.S.C 130 in view of Dekker have been fully considered and are moot in light of the recent amendments to the claims. The rejections of 4/9/2025 have been withdrawn because the claims were amended and change the scope of the claims.
Claim Interpretation
The examiner interprets a finishing treatment as a process with a laser that performs a function that performs a non-joining and non-cutting per claim 1 of the instant application.
The examiner interprets a non-joining and non-cutting treatment as a laser beam process that does not perform a welding or ablative process and is understood herein to be a heating process.
The examiner respectfully points out that the specification is light on what the applicant intends a finishing treatment, non-joining, and non-cutting treatment to be which forces the spec to be read on broadly. For this reason, the rejection herein is based on this broad interpretation.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 13, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious by US 10406634 B2 Li .
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches, except where struck through,
A method for beam processing of a plate-shaped or tubular workpiece (claim 1; ceramic material 401), comprising:
generating a plurality of sections of a cutting gap (cut 406) cutting through the workpiece along a cutting line by a processing beam (column 5 lines 36 to 43), the cutting line (the cutting region or “region” is a shape denotating a path or cutting line per step 210 and the gap is formed along this line) corresponding to at least part of a contour of a workpiece part to be produced from the workpiece (claim 1), wherein each of the plurality of sections of the cutting gap is generated along a respective portion of the plurality of portions of the cutting line (the cutting region or “region” is a shape denotating a path or cutting line per step 210 and the gap is formed along this line);
and performing one or more finishing treatment of the workpiece (laser beam core 493 is taught to perform a cutting function while outer portions 494 are taught to heat the workpiece which is a form of a finishing treatment column 9 lines 36 to 67) with a partially cut-out workpiece part in at least one section of at least one finishing zone by the processing beam, wherein the at least one finishing zone extends along the cutting line (claim 1 teaches “irradiating a ceramic material to form a cut having a first depth using a first laser-based process having a first laser beam at a first power, the first laser-based process defining a diameter of the cut; heating a region of the ceramic material adjacent to the cut by irradiating the region with the first laser beam subsequent to forming the cut”), and wherein each of the one or more finishing treatments comprises a non-joining and non-cutting treatment (laser beam core 493 is taught to perform a cutting function while outer portions 494 are taught to heat the workpiece which is a form of a finishing treatment and is a non-joining non cutting treatment column 9 lines 36 to 67), and wherein generating the plurality of sections of the cutting gap comprises creating first and second sections of the cutting gap that are immediately adjacent to each other (fig. 4c left and right most outer portions 494 are adjacent to each other as immediately adjacent is interpreted to mean immediately next to they are separated only by the core laser beam 493), (claim 1 teaches “irradiating a ceramic material to form a cut having a first depth using a first laser-based process having a first laser beam at a first power, the first laser-based process defining a diameter of the cut; heating a region of the ceramic material adjacent to the cut by irradiating the region with the first laser beam subsequent to forming the cut”).
Li discloses the claimed invention except for and at least one finishing treatment of the workpiece is performed after creating the first section of the cutting gap and along at least one finishing line corresponding to the first created section of the cutting gap and creating the second section of the cutting gap is after a completion of the at least one finishing treatment of the workpiece. In general, the transposition of process steps or the splitting of one step into two, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes. Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to separate the steps of heating a left and right side of cut 406 with respective left and rightmost outer portions 494, since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in art when the change in shape is not Significant to the function of the combination. Further, one would have been motivated to split the steps heating the left and right most sides of cut 406 for the purpose of to prevent microcracks or other defects in the material (Li column 10 lines 12 to 30).
Regarding claim 4,
Li teaches the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
Li further teaches,
wherein a finishing treatment of the workpiece is performed in a section of the at least one finishing zone that at least partially does not include a section of the cutting gap (column 9 lines 49 to 54 where the examiner considers side surfaces 404 to be sections of the cutting gap known as cut 406; column 10 lines 12 to 30 where corners 405 and edge features 407 are considered by the examiner to be the finishing treatment of the workpiece is performed in a section of the at least one finishing zone that at least partially does not include a section of the cutting gap).
Regarding claim 5,
Li teaches the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
Li further teaches,
wherein the finishing treatment of the workpiece is performed continuously in the section of the at least one finishing zone that extends along the section of the cutting gap (column 6 lines 9 to 22 At 220 the examiner considers multiple passes during a laser cycle to be part of performing a laser process continuously because it is part of one continuous operation; column 6 lines 55 to 67 the examiner considers irradiating 7 to 15 pulses during a laser cycle to be part of performing a laser process continuously because it is part of one continuous operation of a limited number of pulses).
Regarding claim 6,
Li teaches the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
Li further teaches,
wherein sections of the cutting gap successively extend the cutting gap (column 6 lines 55 to 67 where the examiner considers irradiating 7 to 15 pulses during a laser cycle to be part of performing a laser process continuously because it is part of one continuous operation of a limited number of pulses and that it is successive because each pulse and subsequent pulse are successive cuts).
Regarding claim 9,
Li teaches the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
Li further teaches, wherein, during a finishing treatment of the workpiece, at least one of a workpiece part-side cutting edge of the cutting gap or a residual grid-side cutting edge of the cutting gap is included in the at least one section of the at least one finishing zone (fig.4E shows the workpiece 402 is irradiated by the processing beam (i.e., 492 pointed at the beam) along the at least one part of the cutting gap 406 in at least one of a region containing a workpiece part-side cutting edge of the cutting gap (i.e., fig.4E shows the processing beam along at one part of the cutting gap).
Regarding claim 10,
Li teaches the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
In said embodiment, Li does not teach comprising: prior to a finishing treatment of the workpiece in a section of the at least one finishing zone, applying a layer of an anti-adhesive agent to the workpiece at least in the finishing zone, the anti-adhesive agent being configured to inhibit adhesion of substances produced during the finishing treatment.
In an alternative embodiment, Li teaches, comprising: prior to a finishing treatment of the workpiece in a section of the at least one finishing zone, applying a layer of an anti-adhesive agent to the workpiece at least in the finishing zone, the anti-adhesive agent being configured to inhibit adhesion of substances produced during the finishing treatment (step 310 from fig. 3 teaches disposing shield on ceramic material and column 8 lines 13 to 20).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine or modify the embodiments in the Li reference, to include comprising: prior to a finishing treatment of the workpiece in a section of the at least one finishing zone, applying a layer of an anti-adhesive agent to the workpiece at least in the finishing zone, the anti-adhesive agent being configured to inhibit adhesion of substances produced during the finishing treatment, for the purpose of providing to prevent adhesion of splatter from laser cutting.
Regarding claim 13,
Li teaches the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
Li further teaches,
wherein performing the at least one non-joining and non- cutting finishing treatment of the workpiece comprises at least one of: i) removing an oxide layer formed when generating the cutting gap, ii) removing a burr in the region of the cutting gap, iii) rounding one or more cutting edges delimiting the cutting gap, iv) changing a shape of at least one cutting edge delimiting the cutting gap, v) generating a chamfer along the cutting gap, vi) heat-treating the workpiece along the cutting gap, or vii) coating the workpiece along the cutting gap (the examiner considers corners 405 and edge features 407 to be chamfers, rounding, changing a shape of, and a way of heat treating).
Regarding claim 16,
Li teaches the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
Li further teaches,
wherein a finishing treatment of the workpiece is performed along one of: a finishing line identical to the cutting line, or a finishing line laterally offset from the cutting line (figs. 4e through 4h and 5d teach the formation of 405, 407 and 507 as being offset from cut 406).
Claim(s)7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious by US 10406634 B2 Li in view of Dekker et al. (US 5,084,604).
Regarding claim 7,
Li teaches the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Li teaches a region that is being cut and heated by a laser beam as discussed above but is not specific on the layout of the laser cutting path that forms a region and Li does not teach: wherein a last-generated section of the cutting gap has a length that is shorter than respective lengths of previously generated sections of the cutting gap.
Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, there were design incentives for implementing the claimed variation. Specifically, Dekker teaches a method of severing a plate of brittle material (abstract and claim 1) along a cutting path, desired cutting line 7, and further teaches wherein a last-generated section of the cutting gap has a length that is shorter than respective lengths of previously generated sections of the cutting gap (fig.1 shows laser cutting 9 with heat source 5. Col.1 at lines 49-56, i.e., desired cutting line 7. Fig.3 show an example of desired cutting line 17 that does not completely cut out the workpiece part. Abstract, i.e., means of a heat source 5 is a thermal load is provided along a heating track asymmetrically with respect to the desired cutting line 7).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Li with Dekker et al., by modifying Li’s cutting procedure according to Dekker et al.’s cutting procedure, to provide a desired length of a cutting line.
Regarding claim 8,
The primary combination teaches the method of claim 7.
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Li does not teach: wherein the lengths of the sections of the cutting gap, starting from a free-cutting point of the workpiece part, are kept constant or increase counter to a direction for generating the cutting gap.
Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, there were design incentives for implementing the claimed variation. Specifically, Dekker teaches wherein the lengths of the sections of the cutting gap, starting from a free-cutting point of the workpiece part, are kept constant or increase counter to a direction for generating the cutting gap (fig.1 shows laser cutting 9 with heat source 5. Col.1 at lines 49-56, i.e., desired cutting line 7. Fig.3 show an example of desired cutting line 17 that does not completely cut out the workpiece part. Abstract, i.e., means of a heat source 5 is a thermal load is provided along a heating track asymmetrically with respect to the desired cutting line 7).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Li with Dekker et al., by modifying Li’s cutting procedure according to Dekker et al.’s cutting procedure, to provide a desired length of a cutting line.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10406634 B2 Li in view of US 10155286 B2 Saegmueller
Regarding claim 11,
The primary combination teaches the method of claim 1.
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Li does not teach: wherein the processing beam is guided with a meandering movement along at least one section of the cutting line during performing the one or more finishing treatment of the workpiece.
Saegmueller teaches wherein the processing beam is guided with a meandering movement along at least one section of the cutting line during performing the one or more finishing treatment of the workpiece (Column 2 lines 21 to 58 teach that it is well known in the art to use a meandering movement with a laser to process a workpiece and a meandering movement is one of a finite number of laser movements known to be useful for laser processing).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, there had been a recognized problem or need in the art to solve the problem of matching a pulse path to the shape of a pulse area (Saegmueller column 2 lines 40 to 44).
There were a finite number of identified and predictable potential solutions to the recognized need or problem evidenced by Saegmueller teaching that a meandering path can be used for forming the region of ceramic material to be cut out by Li.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try because A meandering movement is one of a finite number of laser movements known to be useful for laser processing.
The results would have been predictable, since Saegmueller teaches using a meandering path to remove material layer-by layer over a surface of a blank to produce a desired chip groove (Saegmueller column 2 lines 39 to 58).
Therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success because a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but or ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10406634 B2 Li in view of Ottnad (US 2018/0001421)
Regarding claim 12,
Li teaches the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Li does not teach comprising: cutting free the workpiece by the processing beam after performing the one or more finishing treatments of the workpiece.
Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, there were design incentives for implementing the claimed variation. Specifically, Ottnad teaches comprising: cutting free the workpiece by the processing beam after performing the one or more finishing treatments of the workpiece ([0056], i.e., During the separation of a workpiece part 18 by cutting along the cut contour 17 thereof, which runs parallel and perpendicular to the X direction, a situation may arise in which, in the end position in which the workpiece part 18 has been entirely separated from the remaining workpiece at a separation-by-cutting position FP and [0047] A laser cutting head 9 that directs and focuses the laser beam 3 on the workpiece 2. It is inherently and necessarily that the laser has a power density which can be a first power density in order to cut workpiece).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Li with Ottnad’s et al., by modifying Li’s cutting procedure according to Ottnad’s et al.’s cutting procedure, to provide a desired length of a cutting line.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10406634 B2 Li in view of Ottnad (US 2018/0001421).
Regarding claim 17, Li teaches, except where struck through,
A beam processing device (laser 491) comprising:
a beam head (laser 491) configured to guide a processing beam (laser 492);
generating a plurality of sections of a cutting gap (cut 406) cutting through a workpiece along a cutting line by a processing beam (column 5 lines 36 to 43), wherein the cutting line (the cutting region or “region” is a shape denotating a path or cutting line per step 210 and the gap is formed along this line) corresponds to at least part of a contour of a workpiece part to be produced from the workpiece (claim 1), wherein each of the plurality of section of the cutting gap is generated along a respective portion of the plurality of portions of the cutting line (the cutting region or “region” is a shape denotating a path or cutting line per step 210 and the gap is formed along this line);
and performing one or more finishing treatment of the workpiece (laser beam core 493 is taught to perform a cutting function while outer portions 494 are taught to heat the workpiece which is a form of a finishing treatment column 9 lines 36 to 67) with a partially cut-out workpiece part in at least in one section of at least one finishing zone by the processing beam, wherein the at least one finishing zone extends along the cutting line (claim 1 teaches “irradiating a ceramic material to form a cut having a first depth using a first laser-based process having a first laser beam at a first power, the first laser-based process defining a diameter of the cut; heating a region of the ceramic material adjacent to the cut by irradiating the region with the first laser beam subsequent to forming the cut”), and wherein each of the one or more finishing treatments comprises a non-joining and non-cutting treatment (laser beam core 493 is taught to perform a cutting function while outer portions 494 are taught to heat the workpiece which is a form of a finishing treatment and is a non-joining non cutting treatment column 9 lines 36 to 67), wherein generating the plurality of sections of the cutting gap comprises creating first and second sections of the cutting gap that are immediately adjacent to each other (fig. 4c left and right most outer portions 494 are adjacent to each other as immediately adjacent is interpreted to mean immediately next to they are separated only by the core laser beam 493), and wherein, during performing the one or more finishing treatments of the workpiece, the partially cut-out workpiece part is not completely cut out of the workpiece and remains firmly connected to the workpiece (claim 1 teaches “irradiating a ceramic material to form a cut having a first depth using a first laser-based process having a first laser beam at a first power, the first laser-based process defining a diameter of the cut; heating a region of the ceramic material adjacent to the cut by irradiating the region with the first laser beam subsequent to forming the cut” since the heating process is not a cutting process it is anticipated that the heated area as taught by Li remains connected to the workpiece).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Li does not teach: and an electronic control device configured to control beam processing of plate-shaped or tubular workpieces, wherein the electronic control device comprises:
at least one processor;
and one or more memories coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions for execution by the at least one processor to perform operations…nor…and at least one finishing treatment of the workpiece is performed after creating the first section of the cutting gap and along at least one finishing line corresponding to the first created section of the cutting gap, and creating the second section of the cutting gap is after a completion of the at least one finishing treatment of the workpiece.
Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, there were design incentives for implementing the claimed variation. Specifically, Ottnad teaches a machine and method for separative machining of plate shaped workpiece including a laser beam 3 of a workpiece 2 and further teaches an electronic control device (para.0053, i.e., a control device 15) configured to control beam processing of plate-shaped or tubular workpieces ( par. 53)([0033], i.e., a control device that is designed or programmed to position at least one of the support carriages, in particular exactly two, of the support carriages under a workpiece part that is to be separated by cutting during the cutting machining process); and one or more memories coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions for execution by the at least one processor to perform operations comprising ([0033], i.e., a control device that is designed or programmed to position at least one of the support carriages, in particular exactly two, of the support carriages under a workpiece part that is to be separated by cutting during the cutting machining process).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify the device in the Li by Ottnad, for the purpose of providing a non-transitory medium to execute the method of Li.
Li discloses the claimed invention except for and at least one finishing treatment of the workpiece is performed after creating the first section of the cutting gap and along at least one finishing line corresponding to the first created section of the cutting gap, and creating the second section of the cutting gap is after a completion of the at least one finishing treatment of the workpiece. In general, the transposition of process steps or the splitting of one step into two, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes. Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to separate the steps of heating a left and right side of cut 406 with respective left and rightmost outer portions 494, since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in art when the change in shape is not Significant to the function of the combination. Further, one would have been motivated to split the steps heating the left and right most sides of cut 406 for the purpose of to prevent microcracks or other defects in the material.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10406634 B2 Li in view of Ishibe (JP H08108287).
Regarding claim 15,
Li teaches the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Li does not teach wherein the processing beam has a first power density for generating the at least one section of the cutting gap and a second power density for performing the one or more finishing treatment of the workpiece, and wherein the second power density is smaller than the first power density.
Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, there were design incentives for implementing the claimed variation. Specifically, Ishibe teaches, wherein the processing beam has a first power density for generating the at least one section of the cutting gap and a second power density for performing the one or more finishing treatment of the workpiece, and wherein the second power density is smaller than the first power density ([0006] [Example 1 In a carbon dioxide laser processing apparatus, first, oxygen was used as an assist gas, a light source output was 500 W, a moving speed of a work (1 mm thick stainless steel plate) was 1 m / min, and a laser beam 4 was emitted as shown in FIGS. It was cut at just focus. An edge 2 is formed on the cut portion of the work 1 … Example 2 Oxygen was used as an assist gas, the light source output was 300 W, and the workpiece was … Edges that are normally seen were formed on the cut part of the work. Irradiate the edge part of this work with a light source output of 300 W and a work moving speed of 2.4 m / min at a position where nitrogen is used as an assist gas and the center of the laser beam is displaced 0.3 mm from the edge part. did. This enabled good chamfering. The first power density is the cutting output 500W which is for cutting as shown in figs.1-2 and the second power density is 300W which is for chamfering as shown in fig.4).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Li with Ishibe, by adding Ishibe’s chamfering process to Li cutting procedure, to provide desired cutting shape on a workpiece.
Claims 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ottnad (US 2018/0001421).
Regarding claim 18,
Ottnad teaches, except where struck through, A non-transitory computer readable storage medium having machine-executable instructions stored thereon that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations for beam processing of a plate-shaped or tubular workpiece ([0033], i.e., a control device that is designed or programmed to position at least one of the support carriages, in particular exactly two, of the support carriages under a workpiece part that is to be separated by cutting during the cutting machining process. Workpiece 2 is a plate-shaped), the operations comprising:
generating a plurality of sections of a cutting gap cutting through the workpiece along a cutting line by a processing beam (a laser beam 3), wherein the cutting line corresponds to at least part of a contour of a workpiece part to be produced from the workpiece ([0056], i.e., During the separation of a workpiece part 18 by cutting along the cut contour 17 thereof, which runs parallel and perpendicular to the X direction, a situation may arise in which, in the end position in which the workpiece part 18 has been entirely separated from the remaining workpiece at a separation-by-cutting position FP),
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Ottnad does not teach: wherein each of the plurality of sections of the cutting gap is generated along a respective portion of the plurality of portions of the cutting line; and performing one or more finishing treatments of the workpiece with a partially cut-out workpiece part in at least in one section of at least one finishing zone by the processing beam, wherein the at least one finishing zone extends along the cutting line, and wherein each of the one or more finishing treatments comprises a non-joining and non-cutting treatment, wherein generating the plurality of sections of the cutting gap comprises creating first and second sections of the cutting gap that are immediately adjacent to each other,…nor…and at least one finishing treatment of the workpiece is performed after creating the first section of the cutting gap and along at least one finishing line corresponding to the first created section of the cutting gap, and creating the second section of the cutting gap is after a completion of the at least one finishing treatment of the workpiece, and wherein, during performing the one or more finishing treatments of the workpiece, the partially cut-out workpiece part is not completely cut out of the workpiece and remains firmly connected to the workpiece.
Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, there were design incentives for implementing the claimed variation. Specifically, Li teaches a laser 491 irradiating a substrate or workpiece with a laser beam 492 and also teaches, except where struck through,
wherein each of the plurality of sections of the cutting gap is generated along a respective portion of the plurality of portions of the cutting line (the cutting region or “region” is a shape denotating a path or cutting line per step 210 and the gap is formed along this line); and performing one or more finishing treatments of the workpiece (laser beam core 493 is taught to perform a cutting function while outer portions 494 are taught to heat the workpiece which is a form of a finishing treatment column 9 lines 36 to 67) with a partially cut-out workpiece part in at least in one section of at least one finishing zone by the processing beam, wherein the at least one finishing zone extends along the cutting line (claim 1 teaches “irradiating a ceramic material to form a cut having a first depth using a first laser-based process having a first laser beam at a first power, the first laser-based process defining a diameter of the cut; heating a region of the ceramic material adjacent to the cut by irradiating the region with the first laser beam subsequent to forming the cut”), and wherein each of the one or more finishing treatments comprises a non-joining and non-cutting treatment (laser beam core 493 is taught to perform a cutting function while outer portions 494 are taught to heat the workpiece which is a form of a finishing treatment and is a non-joining non cutting treatment column 9 lines 36 to 67), wherein generating the plurality of sections of the cutting gap comprises creating first and second sections of the cutting gap that are immediately adjacent to each other (fig. 4c left and right most outer portions 494 are adjacent to each other as immediately adjacent is interpreted to mean immediately next to they are separated only by the core laser beam 493),…and…and wherein, during performing the one or more finishing treatments of the workpiece, the partially cut-out workpiece part is not completely cut out of the workpiece and remains firmly connected to the workpiece (claim 1 teaches “irradiating a ceramic material to form a cut having a first depth using a first laser-based process having a first laser beam at a first power, the first laser-based process defining a diameter of the cut; heating a region of the ceramic material adjacent to the cut by irradiating the region with the first laser beam subsequent to forming the cut” since the heating process is not a cutting process it is anticipated that the heated area as taught by Li remains connected to the workpiece).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Ottnad with the laser cutting method of Li to prevent microcracks or other defects in the material (Li column 10 lines 12 to 30).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US11602806B2 Lazarus teaches laser cutting a piece of sheet stock such that an axle and rotor are formed, see fig. 2 where release beams are parts that are not finished cut out until axle holders 224 are laser bent into place so the rotor can drop into place see claims 1 to 23.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM M ECKARDT whose telephone number is (313)446-6609. The examiner can normally be reached 6 a.m to 2:00 p.m EST Monday to Friday.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
ADAM MICHAEL. ECKARDT
Assistant Examiner
Art Unit 3761
/ADAM M ECKARDT/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761