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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/16/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed 12/16/2025 have been entered. Accordingly, claims 1-2 and 4-18 are currently pending and have been examined. The Examiner acknowledges the amendments of claim 1. Claim 3 has been cancelled by applicant. The previous 103 rejections have been withdrawn due to applicant’s amendments. However, a new grounds of rejection has been made due to applicant’s amendments.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okumura (WO 2018203516) in view of Belli (EP 1591427) in view of Belli (WO 2019021172), hereinafter refer to as Belli 2.
Regarding claim 1, Okumura discloses: a machine (Figures 1-11 element 1 and see also paragraph 0032) for processing slabs (element G), comprising:
- a device (element 2) for transporting the slabs between two zones (see annotated figures 8-9 below Detail A/B), at least one of which is a machining zone (see annotated figures 2 and 8-9 below Detail A) along a feeding direction (see annotated figures 8-9 below Detail C);
- means for supporting (element 20) the slabs in a machining position (see figure 2 and see also paragraph 0033 where the prior art discloses element CP as “a processing position” (machining position), see paragraph 0051-0052 where the prior art discloses utilizing element 20 to support a “a support surface” of element G (slabs), thus supporting the slab in the machining position);
- at least one tool for machining the slabs (element 3 and see also paragraph 0032 where the prior art discloses element 3 as “an edge processing device” that processes portions of element G (slab)), said at least one tool being operative in the machining zone (see annotated figure 2 below); and
means for moving said device (elements 8/9/10/11 and see also paragraphs 0037-0040), configured to move said device from a working position (see annotated figure 8 below Detail D) corresponding substantially to said machining position for machining the slabs (see annotated figure 8 below) into a position spaced (see annotated figure 8 below Detail E) at least vertically from said working position (see annotated figure 8-9 showing the position spaced (Detail E) being in a lowered position from a raised position of the working position (Detail D)), and vice versa;
wherein said device comprises a conveyor belt (see paragraph 0034 where the prior art discloses element 2 (device) includes “a plurality of conveying belts” (element 6)); and
wherein said means for moving are configured to move said conveyor belt from a raised working position corresponding substantially to said machining position for machining the slabs into a lowered position spaced from said raised working position, and vice versa (See paragraph 0037-0040 where the prior art discloses utilizing elements 8/9/10/11 move element 6 (conveyor belt) “in the up and down direction” (see paragraph 0037), see figure 8 annotated below showing the conveyor belt from a raised working position (Detail F) which correspondence corresponding substantially to said machining position (element CP) into a lowered position (Detail G) spaced from said raised working position (vertically) and being capable of doing vice versa via utilizing elements 8/9/10/11).
PNG
media_image1.png
801
841
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
498
836
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Okumura appears to be silent comprising means for clamping the slabs, designed to clamp the slabs and the least one tool for machining mounted on a spindle.
Belli is also concern in providing a machine (Figures 1-10 element 1 and see paragraph 0017) for processing slabs (element L and see also paragraph 0001), comprising a device (element 9) for transporting the slabs between two zones (see paragraph 0021), at least one of which is a machining zone along a feeding direction (see figure 4 showing different working zones (element C,W,S) and see also paragraph 0026 where the prior art discloses the working zone “W” as the “machining position” (machining zone) along a feeding direction (see x-axis arrow)) and means for supporting and clamping the slabs (Element 4 and see also paragraph 0017 where the prior art discloses “providing means for withholding” element L (slabs) via element 4, and further discloses element 4 as suction-pad blocks which are known in the art to support and hold tightly (via suction). Thus, having means for supporting and clamping the slabs.), designed to clamp the slabs in a machining position (see paragraph 0026/0028).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okumura with the teaching of Belli to provide means for clamping the slabs, designed to clamp the slabs. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize having clamping means would necessarily provide the predictable result of clamping the workpiece during processing, thus preventing the workpiece from falling and being damaged during operations.
However, Okumura modified appears to be silent wherein the least one tool for machining mounted on a spindle.
Belli 2 is also concern in providing a machine (Figures 1-13 element 1 and see also page 5, ll. 28-31) for processing slabs (see page 5, ll. 29-30), the machine comprises at least one tool (element 7 and see also page 6, ll. 2-5 where the prior art discloses element 7 as a “machining head” that includes “a machining tool” (at least one tool)), and wherein the at least one tool for machining is mounted on a spindle (see page 6, ll. 14-21 where the prior art discloses element 7 also comprises “a spindle” wherein the machine tool is “connected to”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okumura with the teaching of Belli 2 to provide wherein the at least one tool for machining is mounted on a spindle. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize having the tool mounted on the spindle would necessarily provide the predictable result of precisely driving the tool during operations and also for tool to be connected to the spindle in an uncouplable manner that allows it to be rapidly replaced as disclosed by Belli 2 (see page 6, ll. 16-17).
Regarding claim 2, Okumura modified discloses: the machine according to Claim 1, characterized in that said movement means are configured to move said conveyor belt along at least a vertical direction perpendicular to the ground (Giving that the prior art discloses the machine including said movement means (elements 8/9/10/11) moving the conveyor belt (see paragraph 0037) in “up and down direction” (vertical direction) and there is no additional structure or structural difference, thus the prior art is capable of having said movement means are configured to move said conveyor belt along at least a vertical direction perpendicular to the ground, as recited.).
Regarding claim 4, Okumura modified discloses: the machine according to the preceding claim, characterized in that said movement means are configured to move said conveyor belt into a further position raised with respect to the position for machining of the slabs (Giving that the prior art meets the structural limitations of the machine including said movement means (see rejection of claim 1 above), and there is no additional structure or structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable of moving said conveyor belt into a further position raised with respect to the position for machining of the slabs, as recited.).
Regarding claim 5, Okumura modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1 and further discloses alternate embodiments (Figures 12 and 13-14), but appears to be silent wherein said movement means comprise a pair of pivots which are positioned below said conveyor belt and are rotatable around respective axes.
Okumura alternate embodiment (Figures 13-14 and see also paragraph 0097) comprising means for moving said device (elements 8/9/10/11) and wherein said movement means comprise a pair of pivots (elements 41/42) which are positioned below said conveyor belt (see figures 13-14 showing elements 41/42 (pair or pivots) positioned below element 9 which is positioned below said conveyor belt (as best shown in figures 8-9), thus the pair of pivots (elements 41/42) would necessarily be positioned below said conveyor belt) and are rotatable around respective axes (see paragraph 0100-0107).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okumura with alternate embodiment Okumura to provide said movement means comprise a pair of pivots which are positioned below said conveyor belt and are rotatable around respective axes. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize having said movement means with the claimed pair of pivots would necessarily provide the predictable result of raising/lowering the conveyor belt at desired heights during operations, thus enhancing the capabilities of the machine.
Regarding claim 6, Okumura modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claims 1 and 5, and further discloses a different means of utilizing pair of pivots (elements 40) in the form of a triangle with one end operably connected to an actuator (element 8) and the other end connected to an arm (element 9) in order to raise and lower the conveyor belt. However, Okumura modified appears to be silent wherein each of said pair of pivots comprises at least one first arm integral with the pivot and integral with said conveyor belt.
Belli is also concern in providing a machine (Figures 1-10 element 1 and see paragraph 0017) for processing slabs (element L and see also paragraph 0001), comprising a conveyor belt (see paragraph 0022 where the prior art disclose element 9 includes element 10 where are “a plurality of motor-driven closed-loop conveyor-belt units” and see paragraph 0023 where the prior art discloses element 10 includes “a closed-loop conveyor belt” (element 11)), means for moving said device (see figures 2-3 elements 3a/20/23-29), configured to move said device from a working position corresponding substantially to said position for machining the slabs into a position spaced at least vertically from said working position (see figures 4-6 and see also paragraphs 0033-0036), said means for moving comprise a pair of pivots (elements 20), similarly one of the pair of pivots having one end operably connected to an actuator (element 29) and the other end connected to an arm (element 17) in order to raise and lower the conveyor belt (see phantom lines) and wherein each of said pair of pivots (see figure 3 annotated below Detail A) comprises at least one first arm integral with the pivot and integral with said conveyor belt (see figure 3 annotated figure 3 below showing the first arm (Detail A) being operably integral with the pivot (element 20) and said conveyor belt (element 11)).
PNG
media_image3.png
485
855
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the pair of pivots in the form of a triangle with one end operably connected to an actuator (element 8) and the other end connected to an arm (element 9) of Okumura with the pair of pivots having at least one first arm integral of Belli which is similarly operably connected to an actuator (element 29) and the other end connected to an arm (element 17), since simple substitution of known elements for another to obtain a predictable results of coupling two different parts. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing a known pivot connection between the actuator and arm would necessarily provide the predictable result of raising/lowering the conveyor belt at desired heights during operations, thus enhancing the capabilities of the machine. (See MPEP 2143.1(B))
Regarding claim 7, Okumura modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claims 1 and 5-6, but appears to be silent wherein said pair of pivots comprise respective second arms, the second arm of at least one of said pair of pivots being connected to a linear actuator so as to cause the rotation of said at least one pivot.
Belli is also concern in providing a machine (Figures 1-10 element 1 and see paragraph 0017) for processing slabs (element L and see also paragraph 0001), comprising a conveyor belt (see paragraph 0022 where the prior art disclose element 9 includes element 10 where are “a plurality of motor-driven closed-loop conveyor-belt units” and see paragraph 0023 where the prior art discloses element 10 includes “a closed-loop conveyor belt” (element 11)), means for moving said device (see figures 2-3 elements 3a/20/23-29), configured to move said device from a working position corresponding substantially to said position for machining the slabs into a position spaced at least vertically from said working position (see figures 4-6 and see also paragraphs 0033-0036), said means for moving comprise a pair of pivots (elements 20), and wherein said pair of pivots comprise respective second arms (see figure 3 annotated below Detail B), the second arm of at least one of said pair of pivots being connected to a linear actuator (see figure 3 annotated below showing at least one of the second arms (left side Detail B) operably connected to a linear actuator (elements 28/29)) so as to cause the rotation of said at least one pivot (see figures 2-3 and see also paragraphs 0033-0035).
PNG
media_image3.png
485
855
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okumura with Belli to provide wherein said pair of pivots comprise respective second arms, the second arm of at least one of said pair of pivots being connected to a linear actuator so as to cause the rotation of said at least one pivot. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing a known pivot connection between the actuator and arm would necessarily provide the predictable result of raising/lowering the conveyor belt at desired heights during operations, thus enhancing the capabilities of the machine.
Regarding claim 8, Okumura modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claims 1 and 5-7, but appears to be silent comprising a connecting bar designed to connect the second arms of said pivots so as to allow the synchronous rotation of said pair of pivots.
Belli is also concern in providing a machine (Figures 1-10 element 1 and see paragraph 0017) for processing slabs (element L and see also paragraph 0001), comprising a conveyor belt (see paragraph 0022 where the prior art disclose element 9 includes element 10 where are “a plurality of motor-driven closed-loop conveyor-belt units” and see paragraph 0023 where the prior art discloses element 10 includes “a closed-loop conveyor belt” (element 11)), means for moving said device (see figures 2-3 elements 3a/20/23-29), configured to move said device from a working position corresponding substantially to said position for machining the slabs into a position spaced at least vertically from said working position (see figures 4-6 and see also paragraphs 0033-0036), said means for moving comprise a pair of pivots (elements 20), and wherein said pair of pivots comprise respective second arms (see figure 3 annotated below Detail B), and further comprising a connecting bar (element 23) designed to connect the second arms of said pivots so as to allow the synchronous rotation of said pair of pivots (see figure 3 annotated above showing the connecting bar (element 23) connecting both second arms (Detail B), thus allowing synchronous rotation of said pivots (element 20)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okumura with Belli to provide a connecting bar designed to connect the second arms of said pivots so as to allow the synchronous rotation of said pair of pivots. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing a known pivot connection between the actuator and arm including having a connecting bar connection said pivots would necessarily provide the predictable result of synchronizing the raising/lowering of the conveyor belt at desired heights during operations, thus enhancing the capabilities of the machine.
Regarding claim 9, Okumura modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent wherein characterized in that said means for supporting and clamping comprise two pairs of cylinders positioned laterally on opposite sides of the conveyor belt.
Belli is also concern in providing a machine (Figures 1-10 element 1 and see paragraph 0017) for processing slabs (element L and see also paragraph 0001), comprising means for supporting and clamping the slabs (Element 4 and see also paragraph 0017 where the prior art discloses “providing means for withholding” element L (slabs) via element 4, and further discloses element 4 as suction-pad blocks which are known in the art to support and hold tightly (via suction). Thus, having means for supporting and clamping the slabs.), designed to clamp the slabs in a machining position (see paragraph 0026/0028), and wherein characterized in that said means for supporting and clamping comprise two pairs of cylinders positioned laterally on opposite sides of the conveyor belt (see figure 1 showing said supporting and clamping means (element 4) being cylinders and having a plurality of pairs positioned laterally on opposite sides (left and right) of different portions of the conveyor belt (element 10 which comprises element 11 (conveyor belt))).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okumura with the teaching of Belli to provide wherein said means for supporting and clamping comprise two pairs of cylinders positioned laterally on opposite sides of the conveyor belt. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize having a known clamping means comprising pairs of cylinders would necessarily provide the predictable result of clamping the workpiece during processing, thus preventing the workpiece from falling and being damaged during operations.
Regarding claim 14, Okumura modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent wherein characterized in that the machine comprises means for aligning the slabs with respect to said conveyor belt.
Belli is also concern in providing a machine (Figures 1-10 element 1 and see paragraph 0017) for processing slabs (element L and see also paragraph 0001), comprising means for supporting and clamping the slabs (Element 4 and see also paragraph 0017 where the prior art discloses “providing means for withholding” element L (slabs) via element 4, and further discloses element 4 as suction-pad blocks which are known in the art to support and hold tightly (via suction). Thus, having means for supporting and clamping the slabs.), designed to clamp the slabs in a machining position (see paragraph 0026/0028), and characterized in that the machine comprises means for aligning the slabs (elements
S
x
/
S
y
) with respect to said conveyor belt (see paragraph 0027 where prior art discloses that it is necessary to refer element L (slab) “precisely in position” which is performed by activating elements
S
x
/
S
y
and see also figure 1 showing the means for aligning the slabs (elements
S
x
/
S
y
) with respect to different portions of the conveyor belt (element 10 which comprises element 11 (conveyor belt))).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okumura with the teaching of Belli to provide means for aligning the slabs with respect to said conveyor belt. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize having alignment means would necessarily provide the predictable result of having the slab precisely in position during operations as disclosed by Belli (see paragraph 0027).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-13 and 15-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 10 (claims 11-13 depend on claim 10) recites limitations related to the
machining for processing slabs, specifically “characterized in that said cylinders are provided with pistons intended to raise the slabs with respect to the conveyor belt and to support the slabs during machining”.
The prior art of Okumura (WO 2018203516) discloses the claim limitations of claim 1 as rejected above, but does not discloses that said cylinders are provided with pistons intended to raise the slabs with respect to the conveyor belt and to support the slabs during machining.
The prior art of Belli (EP 1591427) discloses a machine (Figures 1-10 element 1 and see paragraph 0017) for processing slabs (element L and see also paragraph 0001), and said supporting and clamping means (element 4) being cylinders and having a plurality of pairs positioned laterally on opposite sides (left and right) of different portions of the conveyor belt (element 10). However, the prior art does not disclose that said cylinders are provided with pistons intended to raise the slabs with respect to the conveyor belt and to support the slabs during machining.
The prior art of Feldhoff (DE4308032) discloses a machine for processing rod
shaped profiles (Figures 1-33 and see also paragraph 0001) comprising a conveyor belt (element 24) for transporting the profiles and means for supporting and clamping the profiles (elements 16/20). Furthermore, as best shown in figures 22-26, the means for supporting and clamping the profiles comprises two pair of cylinders (element 106) with pistons (element 108) clamping the profiles against an abutment (element 104a). However, the prior art’s means for supporting and clamping are orientated horizontally in order to laterally support/clamp the profiles against the abutment (see figures 22-25). Thus, the prior art does not disclose that said cylinders are provided with pistons intended to raise the slabs with respect to the conveyor belt and to support the slabs during machining.
Claim 15 (claim 16 depend on claim 15) recites limitations related to the
machining for processing slabs, specifically “characterized in that said supporting and clamping means comprise at least two pairs of grippers mounted on pistons of said cylinders and slidable along a vertical direction and at least two pairs of substantially horizontal supports which are aligned with said grippers along the vertical direction in the lowered position”.
The prior art of Okumura (WO 2018203516) discloses the claim limitations of claim 1 as rejected above, but does not discloses wherein said supporting and clamping means comprise at least two pairs of grippers mounted on pistons of said cylinders and slidable along a vertical direction and at least two pairs of substantially horizontal supports which are aligned with said grippers along the vertical direction in the lowered position.
The prior art of Belli (EP 1591427) discloses a machine (Figures 1-10 element 1 and see paragraph 0017) for processing slabs (element L and see also paragraph 0001), and further discloses said supporting and clamping means (element 4) being cylinders and having a plurality of pairs positioned laterally on opposite sides (left and right) of different portions of the conveyor belt (element 10). However, the prior art does not disclose that said supporting and clamping means comprise at least two pairs of grippers mounted on pistons of said cylinders and slidable along a vertical direction and at least two pairs of substantially horizontal supports which are aligned with said grippers along the vertical direction in the lowered position.
Claim 17 recites limitations related to a method for processing slabs of stone, ceramic or glass material, which method uses the machine according to Claim 1, specifically “a step of positioning the conveyor belt with its upper surface in contact with a bottom surface of the slabs during surface-machining of the slabs”.
The prior art of Okumura (WO 2018203516) discloses the claim limitations of claim 1 as rejected above, and further discloses the step of surface machining the slab (see paragraph 0032). However, the prior art discloses utilizing a base (element 18) that the slab (element G) is placed during machining (see paragraph 0046-0047). Therefore, the prior art is not capable of and fails to discloses a step of positioning the conveyor belt with its upper surface in contact with a bottom surface of the slabs during surface-machining of the slabs.
Claim 18 recites limitations related to a method for processing slabs of stone, ceramic or glass material, which method uses the machine according to Claim 1, specifically “a step of positioning the conveyor belt with its upper surface at a predetermined distance from a bottom surface of the slab during formation of through-recesses in the slab so as to collect a machining swarf”.
The prior art of Okumura (WO 2018203516) discloses the claim limitations of claim 1 as rejected above, and further discloses the step of surface machining the slab (see paragraph 0032). However, the prior art does not disclose the step positioning the conveyor belt with its upper surface at a predetermined distance from a bottom surface of the slab during formation of through-recesses in the slab so as to collect a machining swarf.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot because the arguments do not apply to the current rejections on the new limitations presented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERTO SAENZ whose telephone number is (313)446-6610. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30PM EST.
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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723