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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 August 11, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: there should be a comma after the term “cross-section” and before the term “orthogonal” in Line 22. The comma would make it clear that the cross-section is not orthogonal to the width, but it is the previously recited cross-section that is taken orthogonal to the longitudinal axis. This may also be clarified as “measured in the cross-section perpendicular to the longitudinal axis and orthogonal to the width.” The same issue exists in claim 17, which is also objected to for the same reason as claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 17 recites “partially circular, oval or elliptical . . . .” It is unclear whether the “partially” modifier applies only to the circular limitation or also the oval and elliptical limitations. Appropriate correction required.
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.
Claims 1-8, 10-12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuno et al. (JP 2017-148883 A) in view of Switzer (US Pub. No. 2020/0061727 A1).
(Claims 1 and 17) Tsuno et al. (“Tsuno”) discloses a power skiving tool that includes a shank (12) that extends along a longitudinal axis (O2) of the tool, and a cutting head (at end of shank including cutting portion 11) that is arranged at an end face of the shank (Figs. 1-3). The cutting head includes a plurality of circumferentially arranged teeth (11; Figs. 3, 4). In a cross-section orthogonal to the longitudinal axis, each of the teeth on the cutting head, each of the teeth has a convexly curved outer surface extending between a first and a second end (Figs. 3a, 4 - convex curve defined by curvature R1). For each of the teeth, the first end of the convexly curved outer surface transitions via a first transition outer surface into the convexly curved outer surface of a first adjacent tooth of the plurality of teeth and at a second end of the convexly curved surface opposite the first end transitions via a second transition surface into the convexly curved surface of a second adjacent tooth of the plurality of teeth (Figs. 3a, 4). For each of the teeth, the convexly curved outer surface is rounded and without corners (Fig. 4). The shape of the convexly curved outer surface has a shape that is partially circular, oval or elliptical (Fig. 4). For each of all of the plurality of circumferentially arranged teeth, a respective width (W in annotated Fig. 4) of each tooth of the plurality of teeth, measured in the cross-section as a distance between the first end and the second end, is greater than a height (H in annotated Fig. 4) of each of the plurality of teeth, measured in the cross-section, orthogonal to the width and centrally between the first end and the second end as a distance between the outer surface and a direct connecting line between the first end and the second end (Fig. 4). The plurality of circumferentially arranged teeth are the only teeth on the cutting head (Figs. 3, 4). Tsuno does not explicitly disclose a concave transition surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
274
558
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Switzer discloses a skiving tool (2) having a concave transition surface connecting convexly curved cutting teeth (Fig. 3). At a time prior to filing it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the skiving tool disclosed in Tsuno to have concave transition surfaces as suggested by Switzer as simple substitution of one known element for another leading to a predictable result (discussed below) or as obvious to try - choosing from a finite number of solutions (convex, concave, flat) - leading to the predictable result of clearance between cutting edges while also reducing stress points by elimination of corners between the transition surface and convex tooth. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007) (reciting several exemplary rationales that may support a finding of obviousness).
(Claims 2 and 3) The width of each tooth of the plurality of teeth is more than two or three times the height of the respective tooth (Tsuno annotated Fig. 4).
(Claim 4) A first tangent in said cross-section and being tangential to the convexly curved contour at the first end of the convexly rounded outer surface and a second tangent lying in said cross-section and being tangential to the convexly curved outer surface at the second end of the convexly rounded contour intersect at an angle α, where α is from 60° to 140°. That is, the end points, while not defined with particularity may have a tangent to those end points oriented to fall within the range claimed (Tsuno Fig. 4).
(Claim 5) Each of the first concave transition outer surface and the second concave transition outer surface is a radius when viewed in said cross-section (Switzer Fig. 3).
(Claim 6) The plurality of teeth are identical (Tsuno Figs. 3, 4).
(Claim 7). Each of the plurality of teeth includes a rake face at an end of the cutting head that is facing away from the shank (Tsuno Fig. 3). Tsuno shows, in Figure 3, that the front end surface of the cutting head includes disposed at an inclined angle other than 90 with respect to the longitudinal axis.
If any doubt exists about the skiving tool disclosed in Tsuno having a rake face on the end face of the cutting head, Switzer discloses that the end face of a skiving tool is used as a rake face (22; ¶ 0015). At a time prior to filing it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the skiving tool disclosed in Tsuno with a rake face on the end face as taught by Switzer in order to shear chips away from the workpiece during the skiving operation.
(Claim 8) The rake faces of all the teeth of the plurality of teeth are arranged in a common conical surface that is rotationally symmetrical to the longitudinal axis (Tsuno Fig. 3b).
(Claim 10) Each of the plurality of teeth include a circumferentially arranged flank oriented skew to the longitudinal axis (Tsuno Fig. 3b).
(Claim 11) The plurality of teeth is more than twelve teeth (Tsuno Fig. 3a).
(Claim 12) Tsuno does not explicitly disclose the materials of the cutting head.
Switzer discloses the shank is made of steel (¶ 0020; clm. 4) and the teeth of the cutting head are made of carbide (¶¶ 0021-0022; clms. 5, 6). At a time prior to filing it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the shank in steel and the cutting head in carbide as taught by Switzer in order to reduce the cost of the tool as compared to a tool entirely made of carbide (¶ 0022).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Bolesky (US Patent No. 1,482,110); JP 6330443 B2 (disclosing concave transition surfaces providing clearance for the work material between cuts by the cutting edges).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN RUFO whose telephone number is (571)272-4604. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs.
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, Singh Sunil can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/RYAN RUFO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722
Prosecution Insights