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 .
Claim Interpretation
Claim 10 recites “designed in the form of a circular skiving cutter”. The structure implied by this limitation is that the tool is circular. The prior art will be applied based on whether the “cutter” tool in the prior art is circular. The same interpretation applies to Claims 16 and 22.
Claim 12 recites “tempering steel” or “nitriding steel”. This is interpreted as the claim requiring steels that are formed through a process that includes either tempering or nitriding. This interpretation also applies to Claim 18.
Claim 16 recites “the rotational axes”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. It will be interpreted as referring to the tool and workpiece rotational axis.
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.
Claims 16 and 18-21 are 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 16 recites “the direction”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation.
An attempt was made to discuss this with Applicant’s representative on 04/15/2026. No response was received to the phone call and voicemail.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment to Claims 10, 16 and 22 is supported by Figures 1, 3 and 4.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks filed 03/23/2026, with respect to the rejections of Claims 10, 16, 22 and their dependents have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of Claims 10, 16, 22 and their dependents has been withdrawn.
Afanasev, as relied upon in the prior rejection, does not teach the claims as amended.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 12-15 and 22 are allowed.
Claims 16 and 18-21 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the most relevant prior art found during the search and examination period for the application does not teach or obviate the limitations of Claims 10, 16 or 22.
The claims require a method, device or tool for finishing a workpiece with a tool that is designed 7comprises teeth, wherein the teeth comprise tooth flanks, wherein said tool has machining teeth that engage into tooth gaps of the workpiece in a rolling motion, and wherein said workpiece is carried by a workpiece spindle that is arranged in a skewed manner relative to a tool rotational axis and driven synchronous thereto such that machining edges of the machining teeth machine the tooth flanks of the teeth of the workpiece in [[the]]a direction in which the tooth flanks extend, wherein the machining edges act upon the tooth flanks in a smoothing manner without metal removal, wherein the machining edges comprise a rounding radius, wherein the rounding radius of the machining edges is greater than a machining thickness or a cutting depth of the machining edges into the tooth flank to be machined, and wherein the machining edges extend from a cutting face to an end flank in a cross-section.
The prior art teaches cutters that finish workpieces that operate at a skewed angle relative to the workpiece (See US6151778 Figures 1-2; RU; US2328783 Figure 1-2; US2121479 Figure 1; US1858044 Figure 1-2; RU2332289C1 Figure 9; RU2370731C2 Figure 9) yet fail to disclose all the features of Claims 10, 16 or 22 including “wherein the machining edges comprise a rounding radius, wherein the rounding radius of the machining edges is greater than a machining thickness or a cutting depth of the machining edges into the tooth flank to be machined, and wherein the machining edges extend from a cutting face to an end flank in a cross-section.”
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 Michael W Hotchkiss whose telephone number is (571)272-3854. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 0800-1600.
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, Sunil K Singh 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.
/MICHAEL W HOTCHKISS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights