DETAILED ACTION
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
The amendment filed on 09/04/2026 has been entered and accepted. The amendment with regard to the claim objection of claim 7 has been accepted and the objection has been withdrawn. The amendment with regard to the 112f claim interpretation has been accepted and the interpretation has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding amended claim 1, applicant argues that “Nastasi fails to disclose a main body that is rotatable in a horizontal direction to place the temperature sensor below a lower portion of the weld tip. Moreover, the alignment arm 52 of Nastasi is designed to pivot downwards if the welding tip 22 is out of alignment and is sized to allow the welding tip 22 to pass through the center of it when aligned. As such, it would render the mounting 50 of Nastasi inoperable to provide an alignment arm that pivots horizontally instead” (Page 8 of applicant’s remarks filed 09/04/2026). In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, Hopkins is relied upon to teach the horizontal directional movement. Nastasi Column 3 Lines 42-48 does teach that the welding station moves the monitoring station to the weld tips. Nastasi Column 3 Lines 13-15 teach that monitoring station comprises both a testing element and a tip dresser. In view of these teachings, it is clear that allowing the testing element and tip dresser to be moved relative to the weld tips would not make the mounting of Nastasi unsatisfactory for its intended purpose as Nastasi explicitly teaches of this functionality. Thus, Nastasi teaches of moving a testing element and tip dresser to the welding tips, but does not explicitly specify how this movement is facilitated. Hopkins is then relied upon to teach the horizontal movement and one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have modified Nastasi with Hopkins such as to allow the testing element to be positioned in an idle position when the weld tips are used for welding and a working position when the weld tips interact with the monitoring station (Hopkins Paragraph 5).
Applicant further argues that “one of ordinary skill in the art would not look to Hopkins to modify the mounting 50 of Nastasi as Hopkins relates to a robot positioned welding tip that mounts a welding tip dresser on a dresser arm. See the Abstract of Hopkins. However, placement of a welding tip dresser of Hopkins and the alignment arm 52 have different needs as they perform different functions” (Pages 8-9 of applicant’s remarks filed 09/04/2026). As stated above, Nastasi Column 3 Lines 42-48 does teach that the welding station moves the monitoring station to the weld tips but does not specify exactly how said movement is facilitated, and Nastasi Column 3 Lines 13-15 teach that monitoring station comprises both a testing element and a tip dresser. Hopkins teaches a horizontal rotation means for rotating a tip dresser from an idle position to an engaged position. Since Nastasi teaches that the dressing station is part of the monitoring station, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have had the entire monitoring station, which comprises both a testing element and a tip dresser, rotate horizontally from an idle to an engaged position in the manner taught by Hopkins. In summary, the alignment members 52 of Nastasi modified with Hopkins would not be modified to rotate horizontally, but instead the entire mounting 50 as part of the testing element 30 would be rotated horizontally by a rotating shaft to position the temperature sensors 56 below the welding rod, from an idle to an active position.
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(s) 1 and 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nastasi (US 6750418 B1) in view of Hopkins (US 20080317577 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nastasi (US 6750418 B1) teaches a welding apparatus comprising:
a welding rod (Figures 1-2 Column 2 Lines 28-31, weld tips 22);
a temperature measuring jig configured to measure a temperature of the welding rod (Column 5 Lines 38-50, temperature sensor 56 comprises a sensor to measure a temperature of the welding tip 22), the temperature measuring jig (Figure 1 Column 7 Lines 40-44, testing element 30 of monitoring station 20; Column 3 Lines 63-67, testing element 30 includes a mounting, temperature sensor 56, a lever portion 60, and a pivot 62) including:
a main body (Figure 2 Column 4 Lines 1-19, mounting 50 which includes a lever portion 60);
a temperature sensor positioned at an upper end of the main body (Figure 3, temperature sensor 56 are placed on an upper end of the alignment elements wherein the temperature sensor 56 and alignment elements 52 are located within the top half of the mounting 50); and
a rotating shaft (Column 5 Lines 65-67, pivot 62 which comprises a rod or other suitable pivot element) configured to rotate the main body to position the temperature sensor at a lower end of the welding rod (Column 6 Lines 11-14, lever portion 60 moves around pivot 62 in response to movement of alignment elements 52; capable of rotating the lever portion 60 to position the temperature sensor 56 placed on an upper end of the lever portion at a lower end of the welding tips); and
a welding rod cooler configured to cool the welding rod (Column 7 Lines 40-55, weld tip is cooled using a water cooling system; Column 2 Lines 32-37, welding tips are air cooled).
Nastasi fails to teach:
the rotating shaft is configured to rotate the main body portion in a horizontal direction around the rotating shaft
Hopkins (US 20080317577 A1) teaches a robot positioned welding tip dresser, wherein:
the rotating shaft is configured to rotate the main body portion in a horizontal direction around the rotating shaft (Figure 1 Paragraph 13, pedestal mounts a pivot 24 carrying a pivotable end 26 of a pivoting arm; Paragraphs 19-20, positioning mechanism is moved from idle position to a working position and back again; Figure 1 Paragraph 10, figure 1 is a schematic top view and thus the assembly is moved in a horizontal direction).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nastasi with Hopkins and have a rotating shaft facilitate rotating the entire mounting in a horizontal direction around the shaft located on the mounting. This would have been done to move to facilitate moving the monitoring station (Nastasi Column 7 Lines 38-39) such as to allow the monitoring station to be positioned between an idle position wherein the weld tips can be used for welding (Hopkins Paragraph 5) and a working position wherein the welding tips interact with the monitoring station (Hopkins Paragraph 5).
Regarding claim 3, Nastasi as modified teaches the welding apparatus of claim 2,
wherein the rotating shaft is located on the main body (Figure 2 Column 4 Lines 53, lever portion 60 comprises a pivot 62).
Regarding claim 4, as modified Nastasi teaches the welding apparatus of claim 3.
Hopkins further teaches:
wherein the rotating shaft is configured to rotate the main body between 0 degrees and 90 degrees (Figure 1, the idle position and the working position is within the range of 0 and 90 degrees apart)
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 3.
Regarding claim 5, Nastasi as modified teaches the welding apparatus of claim 1, wherein the welding rod includes an upper welding rod and a lower welding rod (Column 5 Lines 47-50, upper weld tip and lower weld tip; Figure 1, upper and lower welding tip 22 can be seen), and
wherein the temperature sensor is configured to contact a lower end of the upper welding rod (Column 4 Lines 21-33, alignment elements 52 coupled to temperature sensor 56 comprise members shaped like portions of a washer which are operable to move in response to contact with weld tips 22; Figure 2, alignment element 52 contacts a lower end of the upper welding rod when the electrode tip is misaligned) to measure the temperature of the upper welding rod (Column 5 Lines 47-50, one temperature sensor detects an upper weld tip while a second temperature sensor determines temperature of lower weld tip; Column 7 Lines 40-55, testing element determines the temperature of the weld tips).
Hopkins further teaches:
through rotation of the main body (Paragraph 19, robot horizontally pivots the arm such as to position the welding tip against the mounting which includes the temperature sensor)
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 1.
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nastasi (US 6750418 B1) in view of Hopkins (US 20080317577 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wada (WO 2018043738 A1) and RYU (KR 20150006676 A).
Regarding claim 6, Nastasi as modified teaches the welding apparatus of claim 1.
Nastasi fails to teach:
wherein the welding rod cooler includes:
a cooling panel;
a plurality of cooling holes in the cooling panel; and
a blower, the blower being configured to blow cold air flowing through the blower through at least one cooling hole of the plurality of cooling holes to the welding rod.
Wada (WO 2018043738 A1) teaches resistance welding equipment, comprising:
a blower (Paragraph 31, cooling device such as a blower is provided to cool the intermediate electrode 12 at welding standby positions)
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nastasi with Wada and a blower cool the weld tips. This would have been done to facilitate air cooling (Nastasi Column 2 Lines 32-37) and to suppress thermal degradation (Wada Paragraph 31).
Nastasi modified with Wada fails to teach:
a cooling panel;
a plurality of cooling holes in the cooling panel; and
the blower being configured to blow cold air flowing through the blower through at least one cooling hole of the plurality of cooling holes to the welding rod.
RYU (KR 20150006676 A) teaches a cooking structure of a spot welding device, wherein:
the welding rod cooler (Paragraphs 52-53, cooling unit 100) includes:
a cooling panel (Figure 9, shank 9);
cooling hole in the cooling panel (Figure 2 Paragraph 73, shank 9 has a cooling discharge hole 63); and
the air source being configured to blow cold air flowing through the blower through at least one cooling hole of the plurality of cooling holes to the welding rod (Paragraph 70, cooling air is supplied from the vortex tube to discharge the cooling air to the insert tip on the tip base such as to directly cool the insert tip with cool air).
While RYU does not explicitly teach of “a plurality of cooling holes”, the Office further notes that the MPEP teaches that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP §2144.04.VI.B. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have duplicated the cooling hole such as to provide cooling to each of the welding tips. Thus, providing a plurality of holes in the cooling panel for cooling a plurality of welding tips has no patentable significance unless a new or unexpected result is produced.
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nastasi with RYU and have an air source deliver cold air through at least one cooling hole to the welding tip. This would have been done to facilitate cooling welding tips without needing to rely on cooling water which can lead to an increase in maintenance costs (RYU Paragraphs 15-16).
Regarding claim 7, Nastasi as modified teaches the welding apparatus of claim 6, wherein the welding rod includes an upper welding rod and a lower welding rod (Column 5 Lines 47-50, upper weld tip and lower weld tip; Figure 1, upper and lower welding tip 22 can be seen), and
RYU further teaches:
wherein the cooling panel has a shape curved toward a lower end of the upper welding rod (Figure 2, bottom part of shank 9 is curved toward both welding rods which include a lower end of the upper welding rod) such that the cold air is blown to the lower end of the upper welding rod (Paragraph 70, cooling air is supplied from the vortex tube to discharge the cooling air to the insert tip on the tip base such as to directly cool the insert tip with cool air; would have been obvious to have duplicated the cooling discharge hole such as to blow cooling air toward the lower end of the upper welding rod).
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 2.
Regarding claim 8, Nastasi as modified teaches the welding apparatus of claim 6.
RYU further teaches:
the plurality of cooling holes include 5 or fewer cooling holes (Figure 2, a single cooling air discharge hole; would have been obvious to have duplicated the cooling hole for each welding tip intended to be cooled).
While RYU does not explicitly teach of a plurality of cooling holes, the Office further notes that the MPEP teaches that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP §2144.04.VI.B. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have duplicated the cooling hole such as to provide cooling to each of the welding tips. Thus, providing a specific number of cooling holes for cooling a plurality of welding tips has no patentable significance unless a new or unexpected result is produced.
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 6.
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nastasi (US 6750418 B1) in view of Hopkins (US 20080317577 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kusumegi (US 5895585 A).
Regarding claim 11, Nastasi (US 6750418 B1) modified with Hopkins (US 20080317577 A1) teaches a welding method using the welding apparatus of claim 1 (see claim 1 above), the welding rod including an upper welding rod and a lower welding rod (Column 5 Lines 47-50, upper weld tip and lower weld tip; Figure 1, upper and lower welding tip 22 can be seen), the welding method comprising:
contacting the temperature measuring jig to a lower end of the upper welding rod (Column 4, alignment elements 52 coupled to temperature sensor 56 comprise members shaped like portions of a washer which are operable to move in response to contact with weld tips 22; Figure 2, alignment element 52 contacts a lower end of the upper welding rod when the electrode tip is misaligned) to measure the temperature of the lower end of the upper welding rod (Column 7 Lines 31-39, monitoring station is moved toward the welding tips such as to perform testing; Column 5 Lines 47-50, one temperature sensor detects an upper weld tip while a second temperature sensor determines temperature of lower weld tip; Column 7 Lines 40-55, testing element determines the temperature of the weld tips; Column 5 Lines 42-44, temperature sensor detects heat as the weld tips are inserted; Column 7 Lines 56-64, alignment of weld tips is determined while the weld tips are inserted in the testing element; thus steps 202 and 204 of Figure 5 reasonably are performed simultaneously)
moving the temperature measuring jig away from the lower end of the upper welding rod (Column 6 Lines 27-31, weld tips are withdrawn from the testing element 30 after relevant measurements have been made);
moving the upper welding rod in a direction toward the lower welding rod to perform a welding process (Column 2 Lines 37-42, weld tips are brought toward together to form a weld);
contacting the temperature measuring jig to a lower end of the upper welding rod through rotation to measure the temperature of the lower end of the upper welding rod again (Column 3 Lines 39-46, weld tips are moved such as to interact with the monitoring station 20 after a predetermined number of welding jobs; Column 5 Lines 47-50, one temperature sensor detects an upper weld tip while a second temperature sensor determines temperature of lower weld tip; Column 7 Lines 40-55, testing element determines the temperature of the weld tips).
Hopkins further teaches:
moving the temperature measuring jig away from the lower welding rod through rotation
(Figure 1 Paragraph 13, pedestal mounts a pivot 24 carrying a pivotable end 26 of a pivoting arm; Paragraphs 19-20, positioning mechanism is moved from idle position to a working position and back again).
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 1.
Nastasi modified with Hopkins fails to teach:
moving the upper welding rod away from the lower welding rod after the welding process is completed; and
Kusumegi (US 5895585 A) teaches a device for confirming an opening of welding gun, wherein:
moving the upper welding rod away from the lower welding rod after the welding process is completed (Column 2 Lines 11-24, state in which the movable and fixed electrodes are spaced at a maximum distance from each other after each welding is completed); and
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nastasi with Kusumegi and moved the upper and lower welding rods away from each other and verify the fact after the welding process is completed. This would have been done to avoid an operation failure (Kusumegi Column 2 Lines 11-24).
Regarding claim 12, Nastasi as modified teaches the welding method of claim 11, further comprising cooling the lower end of the upper welding rod using the welding rod cooler (Column 7 Lines 40-55, weld tip is cooled using a water cooling system; Column 2 Lines 32-37, welding tips are air cooled).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 FRANKLIN JEFFERSON WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7782. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6PM (E.S.T).
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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.
/F.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/WOODY A LEE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights