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 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 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al (US Publication 2017/0341254), herein referred to as Inoue, in view of Kahkonen et al (US Publication 2014/0238375), herein referred to as Kahkonen, and Briese (US Patent 4,322,189), and further in view of Nomoto et al (US Publication 2005/0277377), herein referred to as Nomoto. Regarding claim 1, Inoue discloses a cutting apparatus (fig. 1) comprising: a chuck table (21) configured to hold a workpiece (W);
a cutting unit (50) having a cutting blade (51) to cut the workpiece held on the chuck table (paragraph 0017, lines 1-3); and
a processing-feed mechanism (paragraph 0018) configured to move the chuck table (21) and the cutting unit (50) relative to each other (paragraph 0019, lines 1-3); the cutting unit including:
a spindle (paragraph 0022, lines 6-7; annotated fig. 3A),
the cutting blade supported to an end portion of the spindle (paragraph 0022, lines 6-7; annotated fig. 3A),
a cover (55) covering the cutting blade and the flange unit (see figs. 3A and 3B; paragraph 0027, lines 1-3 and 8-13), and
a vacuum unit (67) provided to the cover (paragraph 0028, lines 9-14) configured to suck dust scattered inside the cover (paragraph 0025, lines 1-6). Examiner notes that fig. 3A of Inoue depicts a structure that appears to be a flange unit (annotated fig. 3A) for holding the cutting blade (55) on the end of the spindle. Additionally, Inoue states in paragraph 0022, lines 7-9, “[t]he cutting blade 51 is made of abrasive grains of diamond that are cemented together into a disk shape by a bonding agent.” Cutting blades of this type are known to wear out and require replacement. Providing a detachable flange facilitates the replacement of the cutting blade when its cutting edge becomes dull or otherwise incapable of performing the desired cutting operation.
PNG
media_image1.png
354
783
media_image1.png
Greyscale
● Inoue fails to specifically identify a flange unit in the cutting apparatus including a fixed flange that is fixed to an end portion of the spindle to support the cutting blade, and a detachable flange that sandwiches the cutting blade in cooperation with the fixed flange. However, Kahkonen teaches it is known in the art of cutting apparatus for cutting hard materials with a rotary cutting blade (7) to attach the cutting blade to an end portion of a spindle (5) with a flange unit (including “fixed flange” and “detachable flange” identified in annotated fig. 3) including a fixed flange (annotated fig. 3) that is fixed to an end portion of the spindle (this flange is fixed to the portion of the spindle to the left of support bearing 15 in fig. 3 when distal nut 19 is threaded onto the end of the spindle 5 to press detachable flange toward fixed flange [as described in paragraph 0038] which itself is fixed from moving axially inward toward support bearing 15 by proximate nut 19) to support the cutting blade (paragraph 0035, lines 5-6), and a detachable flange (annotated fig. 3) that sandwiches the cutting blade in cooperation with the fixed flange (paragraph 0038).
PNG
media_image2.png
489
692
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue with the teaching of Kahkonen such that the cutting apparatus includes a flange unit including a fixed flange that is fixed to an end portion of the spindle to support the cutting blade and a detachable flange that sandwiches the cutting blade in cooperation with the fixed flange in order to facilitate replacement of the cutting tool when it becomes dull or the operator decides it is necessary to utilize a different cutting tool configured to cut a different type of workpiece by including a detachable flange. ● The modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to specifically include a plurality of first gas jetting passages on a periphery of the fixed flange for jetting gas radially along a cutting edge of the cutting blade and a plurality of second gas jetting passages on a periphery of the detachable flange for jetting gas radially along the cutting edge of the cutting blade. However, Kahkonen teaches it is known in the art of cutting apparatus for cutting hard materials for the fixed and detachable flanges (annotated fig. 3) of the flange unit to be provided with a plurality of cooling fluid passages (radial grooves 32) on a periphery of both of the fixed and detachable flanges (“[t]he flushing fluid can flow along the flushing channels [32] extending to the outer circumference of the blade flanges 8, wherein they form spray openings 18” [emphasis added], paragraph 0037, lines 9-13) for delivering cooling fluid radially along a cutting edge of the cutting blade (paragraph 0036, lines 15-20). Kahkonen depicts spray C as arrows on both sides of cutting blade (7) in figs. 2 and 3, providing further indication that each of the flanges are provided with cooling fluid passages. Examiner notes Kahkonen teaches the coiling fluid passages are used to deliver water as a cooling and flushing fluid rather than using air or compressed gas as a cooling and flushing fluid and thus, does not specifically teach the cooling fluid channels are “gas jetting passages.” However, Briese teaches it is known in the art of using cutting apparatus for cutting hard materials with milling tools to provide a cooling and flushing system that similarly utilizes fluid passages (10, 12, 14) disposed axially through a tool spindle to deliver cooling and flushing fluid to a plurality of radially oriented passages (36) provided in a flange structure (28) configured to distribute the cooling and flushing fluid towards the perimeter of a milling tool (fig. 3). With regards to the cooling and flushing fluid utilized with the cutting apparatus, Briese states in col. 2, lines 55-61, “[w]hen a source of air is used in conjunction with a coolant system [i.e., with liquid coolant] the control valve 22 may serve to provide one of three modes of operation. Specifically, the control valve 22 may be operated to provide only coolant through the ducts 10 and 12 to the milling tool 2, or provide a stream of air, or provide a mist formed by a predetermined combination of air and coolant.” This statement teaches that cooling systems that deliver cooling and flushing liquid through a plurality of cooling passages can alternatively be configured as gas jetting passages for delivering compressed air radially along a cutting edge of the cutting blade. It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue with the teaching of Kahkonen and Briese such that the cooling liquid passages can also be configured as gas jetting passages since Briese “provides a simple but effective coolant flow control system for milling tools used with a milling machine equipped with a center-feed coolant system [and in] the event that a milling tool is not provided with a central duct when manufactured, it is a simple matter to bore or drill a central duct along the longitudinal axis thereof such that a milling tool can be equipped with a coolant flow guide plate in accordance with the present invention” (Briese, col. 4, lines 12-20). By modifying the cutting apparatus with the teaching of Kahkonen and Briese, Inoue’s modified cutting apparatus can be used with a variety of cooling fluids depending upon the requirements of the workpiece being cut, as specifically mentioned by Inoue in paragraphs 0002 and 0003. ● The modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to disclose wherein the spindle includes an annular groove in an outer peripheral surface thereof at an area radially inwardly of where the cutting blade is supported, such that a first portion of the outer peripheral surface is defined --as the entire outer peripheral surface of the spindle-- between the outer threaded portion of the spindle and the annular groove and a second portion of the outer peripheral surface is defined between the annular groove and the fixed flange, wherein the --entire-- first --portion of the outer peripheral surface of the spindle-- and --the-- second portion of the outer peripheral surface are of the same diameter and further wherein the annular groove is configured and arranged to communicate the gas from a communication passage within the spindle to the plurality of first gas jetting passages and the plurality of second gas jetting passages. However, Nomoto teaches it is known in the art of delivering fluids to a rotating cutting tool to provide a spindle (11) with an annular groove (annotated fig. 1) in communication with radial passage (105) which communicates cooling fluid from an axially extending internal spindle passage (fig. 5). Nomoto teaches a respective annular groove is provided in an outer peripheral surface (i.e., surface of second spindle main body 103) thereof at an area radially inwardly of where the cutting blade is supported (fig. 5). Nomoto teaches a first portion of the outer peripheral surface (annotated fig. 1) is defined --as the entire outer peripheral surface of the spindle-- between the outer threaded portion (104) of the spindle and the annular groove (e.g., distal annular groove positioned closer to outer threaded portion 104) and a second portion of the outer peripheral surface (annotated fig. 1) is defined between the annular groove and the fixed flange (101, 102), wherein the --entire-- first --portion of the outer peripheral surface of the spindle-- and --the-- second portion of the outer peripheral surface are of the same diameter (para. 0036, lines 12-14, the entire outer surface of second spindle main body 103 having the same diameter save for the annular groove portions formed therein) and further wherein the annular groove is configured and arranged to communicate fluid from a communication passage (i.e., extending along rotational axis of spindle, visible in partial cross-section of spindle depicted in fig. 5) within the spindle (para. 0036, lines 24-27) to the plurality of radially extending fluid passages (143, 183) in the cutting tool (para. 0036, lines 21-28). Nomoto states in para. 0036, lines 28-35, “[a]lthough as the spindle 11 of the rotary electric or air tool of this embodiment, the one having the multiple steps is adopted, the present invention is not restricted to this example, but it redesigned appropriately corresponding to the fitting hole in each component to be fitted to the spindle 11 or the inside diameter of a used bearing. For example, it is permissible to use a single shaft type having no step” [emphasis added]. Examiner cites proximal portion (101) of spindle (11) and first spindle main body (102) as corresponding to the claimed “fixed flange,” wherein proximal portion (101) provides axial support for the cutting tool overall and first spindle main body (102) provides support for a first bearing (12) that allows guide plate (13) to rotate independently from spindle (11) and cutting tools (14, 18). This allows the user to slowly roll guide plate (13) along the edge of the workpiece while the cutting tools (14, 18) rotate rapidly during cutting operations.
PNG
media_image3.png
530
738
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Nomoto such that an annular groove in an outer peripheral surface of the spindle is provided at an area radially inwardly of where the cutting blade is supported, such that a first portion of the outer peripheral surface is defined as the entire outer peripheral surface of the spindle between the outer threaded portion of the spindle and the annular groove and a second portion of the outer peripheral surface is defined between the annular groove and the fixed flange, wherein the entire first portion of the outer peripheral surface of the spindle and the second portion of the outer peripheral surface are of the same diameter and further wherein the annular groove is configured and arranged to communicate the gas from a communication passage within the spindle to the plurality of first gas jetting passages and the plurality of second gas jetting passages in order to provide a uniform flow and direct passage of gas from the spindle to the cutting plane of the cutting blade. Moreover, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective function and the combination would have yielded predictable results. Regarding claim 4, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes the gas comprises nitrogen (air includes nitrogen).
Regarding claim 5, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes wherein the gas comprises carbon dioxide (air includes carbon dioxide).
Regarding claim 6, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes the gas comprises air in combination with at least one of nitrogen and carbon dioxide (air includes nitrogen and carbon dioxide).
Regarding claim 7, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes the gas comprises a combination of nitrogen and carbon dioxide (air includes nitrogen and carbon dioxide).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Kahkonen (US Publication 2014/0238375), Briese (US Patent 4,322,189), Nomoto (US Publication 2005/0277377) in further view of Lipanski (US Patent 4,619,081).
Regarding claim 2, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes an air inlet (Inoue 64) to facilitate a flow of air through the cover to help remove dust from therein (Inoue fig. 3B) The modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to disclose the cover has a gas jetting nozzle for jetting gas to a region in which the cutting blade cuts the workpiece. However, Lipanski teaches it is known in the art of cutting devices with circular cutting blades (16) and housed within a cover (12, 14) configured “for cutting hard substrate material such as ceramic or semi-conductor material” (col. 1, lines 10-11) into smaller pieces to provide a cooling fluid jetting nozzle (70) for jetting (i.e. supplying) cooling fluid to a region in which the cutting blade cuts the workpiece (see fig. 4 and col. 4, lines 52-58). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Lipanski in order to provide additional air flow “into an efficient contact with the surface of the [cutting] blade and into contact with the cutting area between the blade and the substrate” (Lipanski col. 4, lines 56-58) and to tune the flow of air, with the use of an air foil (78) taught by Lipanski, therein to further improve the debris removal from the cover, particularly since the “flow of [cooling] fluid is hampered by the air flow forces produced by the rotating blade which air flow forces tend to repel the [cooling] fluid from contacting the blade and substrate in the area of the cut” (Lipanski, col. 3, lines 54-57). Examiner notes Lipanski mentions water is used as the cooling fluid (see, e.g., col. 1, lines 21-43). However, it is understood that both gas and liquid are considered fluids, and as noted above in the 103 rejection for claim 1, Inoue acknowledges that while water can be used for cooling and removing debris while cutting some substrates (paragraph 0002), “[s]ome workpieces which are made of resins that absorb water and green ceramics prior to being sintered should be kept out of contact with water [and] need to be cut by a cutting blade while they are being kept dry without being supplied with cutting water” (paragraph 0003, lines 1-5). Moreover, Briese states in col. 2, lines 50-61, a predetermined combination of air and coolant, i.e., a dry mist, or a stream of air, or provide only coolant, thereby allowing the dicing tool to be used for performing cutting operations of a variety of workpieces.
Thus, in view of the disclosure of Inoue and the teaching of Briese, the teaching of Lipanski facilitates a beneficial and predictable solution to improve the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above. As such, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above because all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective function and the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Kahkonen (US Publication 2014/02388375), Briese (US Patent 4,322,189), Nomoto (US Publication 2005/0277377) in further view of Itatani et al (US Publication 2016/0311127), herein referred to as Itatani.
Regarding claim 3, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to specifically disclose the gas comprises air received form a gas supply means at a pressure of between 0.3 and 0.5 MPa. However, Itatani teaches it is known in the art of cutting tools with fluid delivered to the cutting tool (42) to provide a gas supply means (94) for supplying has to the tool, wherein the air received from the gas supply means is at a pressure of between 0.3 and 0.5 MPa (“the pressure of air supplied from the air source 94 to the cleaning fluid supply nozzle 80 is set to be 0.4 MPa,” paragraph 0040, lines 4-6). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Itatani such that the gas comprises air received form a gas supply means at any reasonable pressure, including a pressure of between 0.3 and 0.5 MPa, since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Kahkonen (US Publication 2014/0238375), Briese (US Patent 4,322,189) and Nomoto (US Publication 2005/0277377) in further view of Pearson (US Patent 6,042,461).
Regarding claim 8, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to specifically disclose the fixed flange and the end portion of the spindle are integrally formed. However, Pearson teaches it is known in the art of mounting assemblies for circular blades with flange assembly for the fixed flange and the end portion of the spindle to be integrally formed. Pearson states in col. 2, line 65 - col. 3, line 3, “[t]he inner flange 30 including the spindle is preferably one piece and machined from a suitable steel. However, it should be appreciated that the inner flange may be of two or more pieces providing the pieces are mounted together to co-rotate, and they may be made of any suitable type of material and my any other suitable method.” The teaching of Pearson suggests individual portions of the flange unit and spindle can be formed as one piece or as separate pieces that are fixed together. It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Pearson such that the fixed flange is integrally formed as part of the spindle since “the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.” In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965) Regarding claim 18, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above as set forth in the 103 rejection for claim 1 includes a cutting apparatus (Inoue, fig. 1) comprising: a chuck table configured to hold a workpiece; a cutting unit having a cutting blade to cut the workpiece held on the chuck table; and a processing-feed mechanism configured to move the chuck table and the cutting unit relative to each other; the cutting unit including: a spindle including an outer threaded portion, the cutting blade supported to an end portion of the spindle, a flange unit including a fixed flange that is fixed to the end portion of the spindle to support the cutting blade and has a plurality of first gas jetting passages on a periphery thereof for jetting gas radially along a cutting edge of the cutting blade, and a detachable flange that sandwiches the cutting blade in cooperation with the fixed flange and has a plurality of second gas jetting passages on a periphery thereof for jetting gas radially along the cutting edge of the cutting blade, a cover covering the cutting blade and the flange unit, and a vacuum unit provided to the cover and configured to suck dust scattered inside the cover, and wherein the spindle includes an annular groove in an outer peripheral surface thereof at an area radially inwardly of where the cutting blade is supported, such that a first portion of the outer peripheral surface of the spindle is defined as the entire outer peripheral surface of the spindle between the outer threaded portion of the spindle and the annular groove and a second portion of the outer peripheral surface of the spindle is defined as the entire outer peripheral surface of the spindle between the annular groove and the fixed flange (as taught by Nomoto, annotated fig. 1, for a spindle configured to hold one cutting blade, one annular groove is provided), and wherein the entire first portion of the outer peripheral surface of the spindle and the entire second portion of the outer peripheral surface of the spindle are of the same diameter, and wherein the annular groove is configured and arranged to communicate the gas from a communication passage within the spindle to the plurality of first gas jetting passages and the plurality of second gas jetting passages. The modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to include wherein the fixed flange is integrally formed as part of the spindle. However, Pearson teaches it is known in the art of mounting assemblies for circular blades with flange assembly for the fixed flange and the end portion of the spindle to be integrally formed. Pearson states in col. 2, line 65 - col. 3, line 3, “[t]he inner flange 30 including the spindle is preferably one piece and machined from a suitable steel. However, it should be appreciated that the inner flange may be of two or more pieces providing the pieces are mounted together to co-rotate, and they may be made of any suitable type of material and my any other suitable method.” The teaching of Pearson suggests individual portions of the flange unit and spindle can be formed as one piece or as separate pieces that are fixed together.
It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Pearson such that the fixed flange is integrally formed as part of the spindle since “the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.” In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965)
Claims 10, 13, 14, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254) in view of Kahkoken (US Publication 2014/02388375) and Briese (US Patent 4,322,189) and further in view of Sato (US Publication 2006/0178098) and Junker (US Patent 4,577,440). Regarding claim 10, Inoue discloses a cutting apparatus (fig. 1) comprising: a chuck table (21) configured to hold a workpiece (W);
a cutting unit (50) having a cutting blade (51) to cut the workpiece held on the chuck table (paragraph 0017, lines 1-3); and
a processing-feed mechanism (paragraph 0018) configured to move the chuck table (21) and the cutting unit (50) relative to each other (paragraph 0019, lines 1-3); the cutting unit including:
a spindle (paragraph 0022, lines 6-7; annotated fig. 3A),
the cutting blade supported to an end portion of the spindle (paragraph 0022, lines 6-7; annotated fig. 3A),
a cover (55) covering the cutting blade and the flange unit (see figs. 3A and 3B; paragraph 0027, lines 1-3 and 8-13), and
a vacuum unit (67) provided to the cover (paragraph 0028, lines 9-14) configured to suck dust scattered inside the cover (paragraph 0025, lines 1-6). Examiner notes that fig. 3A of Inoue depicts a structure that appears to be a flange unit (annotated fig. 3A) for holding the cutting blade (55) on the end of the spindle. Additionally, Inoue states in paragraph 0022, lines 7-9, “[t]he cutting blade 51 is made of abrasive grains of diamond that are cemented together into a disk shape by a bonding agent.” Cutting blades of this type are known to wear out and require replacement. Providing a detachable flange facilitates the replacement of the cutting blade when its cutting edge becomes dull or otherwise incapable of performing the desired cutting operation. ● Inoue fails to specifically identify a flange unit in the cutting apparatus including a fixed flange that is fixed to an end portion of the spindle to support the cutting blade, and a detachable flange that sandwiches the cutting blade in cooperation with the fixed flange. However, Kahkonen teaches it is known in the art of cutting apparatus for cutting hard materials with a rotary cutting blade (7) to attach the cutting blade to an end portion of a spindle (5) with a flange unit (including “fixed flange” and “detachable flange” identified in annotated fig. 3) including a fixed flange (annotated fig. 3) that is fixed to an end portion of the spindle (this flange is fixed to the portion of the spindle to the left of support bearing 15 in fig. 3 when distal nut 19 is threaded onto the end of the spindle 5 to press detachable flange toward fixed flange [as described in paragraph 0038] which itself is fixed from moving axially inward toward support bearing 15 by proximate nut 19) to support the cutting blade (paragraph 0035, lines 5-6), and a detachable flange (annotated fig. 3) that sandwiches the cutting blade in cooperation with the fixed flange (paragraph 0038). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue with the teaching of Kahkonen such that the cutting apparatus includes a flange unit including a fixed flange that is fixed to an end portion of the spindle to support the cutting blade and a detachable flange that sandwiches the cutting blade in cooperation with the fixed flange in order to facilitate replacement of the cutting tool when it becomes dull or the operator decides it is necessary to utilize a different cutting tool configured to cut a different type of workpiece by including a detachable flange. ● The modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to specifically include a plurality of first gas jetting passages on a periphery of the fixed flange for jetting gas radially along a cutting edge of the cutting blade and a plurality of second gas jetting passages on a periphery of the detachable flange for jetting gas radially along the cutting edge of the cutting blade. However, Kahkonen teaches it is known in the art of cutting apparatus for cutting hard materials for the fixed and detachable flanges (annotated fig. 3) of the flange unit to be provided with a plurality of cooling fluid passages (radial grooves 32) on a periphery of both of the fixed and detachable flanges (“[t]he flushing fluid can flow along the flushing channels [32] extending to the outer circumference of the blade flanges 8, wherein they form spray openings 18” [emphasis added], paragraph 0037, lines 9-13) for delivering cooling fluid radially along a cutting edge of the cutting blade (paragraph 0036, lines 15-20). Kahkonen depicts spray C as arrows on both sides of cutting blade (7) in figs. 2 and 3, providing further indication that each of the flanges are provided with cooling fluid passages. Kahkonen teaches the coiling fluid passages are used to deliver water as a cooling and flushing fluid rather than using air or compressed gas as a cooling and flushing fluid and thus, does not specifically teach the cooling fluid channels are “gas jetting passages.” To resolve this deficiency, Briese teaches it is known in the art of using cutting apparatus for cutting hard materials with milling tools to provide a cooling and flushing system that similarly utilizes fluid passages (10, 12, 14) disposed axially through a tool spindle to deliver cooling and flushing fluid to a plurality of radially oriented passages (36) provided in a flange structure (28) configured to distribute the cooling and flushing fluid towards the perimeter of a milling tool (fig. 3). With regards to the cooling and flushing fluid utilized with the cutting apparatus, Briese states in col. 2, lines 55-61, “[w]hen a source of air is used in conjunction with a coolant system [i.e., with liquid coolant] the control valve 22 may serve to provide one of three modes of operation. Specifically, the control valve 22 may be operated to provide only coolant through the ducts 10 and 12 to the milling tool 2, or provide a stream of air, or provide a mist formed by a predetermined combination of air and coolant.” This statement teaches that cooling systems that deliver cooling and flushing liquid through a plurality of cooling passages can alternatively be configured as gas jetting passages for delivering compressed air radially along a cutting edge of the cutting blade. It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue with the teaching of Kahkonen and Briese such that the cooling liquid passages can also be configured as gas jetting passages since Briese “provides a simple but effective coolant flow control system for milling tools used with a milling machine equipped with a center-feed coolant system [and in] the event that a milling tool is not provided with a central duct when manufactured, it is a simple matter to bore or drill a central duct along the longitudinal axis thereof such that a milling tool can be equipped with a coolant flow guide plate in accordance with the present invention” (Briese, col. 4, lines 12-20). By modifying the cutting apparatus with the teaching of Kahkonen and Briese, Inoue’s modified cutting apparatus can be used with a variety of cooling fluids depending upon the requirements of the workpiece being cut, as specifically mentioned by Inoue in paragraphs 0002 and 0003.
● The modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to disclose the spindle includes a plurality of protruding portions extending radially outwardly, and wherein the plurality of protruding portions integrally formed as part of the spindle and are configured and arranged to abut against an opening portion of the cutting blade, and further wherein the plurality of protruding portions do not extend radially outwardly of the circular opening of the annular cutting blade. However, the following references provide teaching pertinent to this limitation: A. Sato (US Publication 2006/0178098) teaches it is known in the art of cutting apparatus to include a cutting unit (e.g., figs. 1 or 7) having an annular blade (28) to cut a workpiece, wherein the annular cutting blade includes a circular opening (32); wherein the cutting unit includes a spindle (6), the annular cutting blade supported to an end portion (8) of the spindle, a flange unit (6, 30) including a fixed flange (6) that is fixed to the end portion of the spindle to support the annular cutting blade (28), wherein further wherein a protruding portion (24) is configured and arranged to abut against the circular opening (32) of the annular cutting blade (para. 0025), and further wherein the protruding portion does not extend radially outwardly of the circular opening of the annular cutting blade (fig. 6). B. Junker (US Patent 4,577,440) teaches it is known in the art of mounting annular blades on a spindle (4) to provide a plurality of protruding portions (9) extending radially outwardly (figs. 3 and 4), and further wherein the plurality of protruding portions are configured and arranged to abut against the circular opening (10) of the annular cutting blade, and further wherein the plurality of protruding portions (9) do not extend radially outwardly of the circular opening of the annular cutting blade (col. 3, line 61 to col. 4, line 4). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Sato and Junker such that a plurality of protruding portions extending radially outwardly, and further wherein the plurality of protruding portions are integrally formed as part of the spindle and are configured and arranged to abut against the circular opening of the annular cutting blade, and further wherein the plurality of protruding portions do not extend radially outwardly of the circular opening of the annular cutting blade because all claimed elements (i.e., a single continuous protrusion or a plurality of individual protrusions) were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective function and the combination would have yielded predictable results (the addition of the protrusions allows for the centering of the annular blade with respect to the rotational axis of the spindle).
In other words, the aforementioned modification would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention because the plurality of protrusions help to accurately position the blade with respect to the rotational axis of the spindle between the fixed flange and the detachable flange, thereby minimizing any vibration on the spindle during a cutting operation. Regarding claim 13, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes the gas comprises nitrogen (the composition of air includes nitrogen).
Regarding claim 14, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes wherein the gas comprises carbon dioxide (the composition of air includes carbon dioxide).
Regarding claim 16, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes the gas comprises air in combination with at least one of nitrogen and carbon dioxide (the composition of air includes nitrogen and carbon dioxide).
Regarding claim 17, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes the gas comprises a combination of nitrogen and carbon dioxide (the composition of air includes nitrogen and carbon dioxide).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Kahkoken (US Publication 2014/02388375), Briese (US Patent 4,322,189), Sato (US Publication 2006/0178098) and Junker (US Patent 4,577,440) in further view of Lipanski (US Patent 4,619,081).
Regarding claim 11, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes an air inlet (Inoue 64) to facilitate a flow of air through the cover to help remove dust from therein (Inoue fig. 3B) The modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to disclose the cover has a gas jetting nozzle for jetting gas to a region in which the cutting blade cuts the workpiece. However, Lipanski teaches it is known in the art of cutting devices with circular cutting blades (16) and housed within a cover (12, 14) configured “for cutting hard substrate material such as ceramic or semi-conductor material” (col. 1, lines 10-11) into smaller pieces to provide a cooling fluid jetting nozzle (70) for jetting (i.e. supplying) cooling fluid to a region in which the cutting blade cuts the workpiece (see fig. 4 and col. 4, lines 52-58). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Lipanski in order to provide additional air flow “into an efficient contact with the surface of the [cutting] blade and into contact with the cutting area between the blade and the substrate” (Lipanski col. 4, lines 56-58) and to tune the flow of air, with the use of an air foil (78) taught by Lipanski, therein to further improve the debris removal from the cover, particularly since the “flow of [cooling] fluid is hampered by the air flow forces produced by the rotating blade which air flow forces tend to repel the [cooling] fluid from contacting the blade and substrate in the area of the cut” (Lipanski, col. 3, lines 54-57). Examiner notes Lipanski mentions water is used as the cooling fluid (see, e.g., col. 1, lines 21-43). However, it is understood that both gas and liquid are considered fluids, and as noted above in the 103 rejection for claim 1, Inoue acknowledges that while water can be used for cooling and removing debris while cutting some substrates (paragraph 0002), “[s]ome workpieces which are made of resins that absorb water and green ceramics prior to being sintered should be kept out of contact with water [and] need to be cut by a cutting blade while they are being kept dry without being supplied with cutting water” (paragraph 0003, lines 1-5). Moreover, Briese states in col. 2, lines 50-61, a predetermined combination of air and coolant, i.e., a dry mist, or a stream of air, or provide only coolant, thereby allowing the dicing tool to be used for performing cutting operations of a variety of workpieces.
Thus, in view of the disclosure of Inoue and the teaching of Briese, the teaching of Lipanski facilitates a beneficial and predictable solution to improve the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above. As such, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above because all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective function and the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Kahkonen (US Publication 2014/02388375), Briese (US Patent 4,322,189), Sato (US Publication 2006/0178098) and Junker (US Patent 4,577,440) in further view of Itatani et al (US Publication 2016/0311127), herein referred to as Itatani.
Regarding claim 12, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to specifically disclose the gas comprises air received form a gas supply means at a pressure of between 0.3 and 0.5 MPa. However, Itatani teaches it is known in the art of cutting tools with fluid delivered to the cutting tool (42) to provide a gas supply means (94) for supplying has to the tool, wherein the air received from the gas supply means is at a pressure of between 0.3 and 0.5 MPa (“the pressure of air supplied from the air source 94 to the cleaning fluid supply nozzle 80 is set to be 0.4 MPa,” paragraph 0040, lines 4-6). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Itatani such that the gas comprises air received form a gas supply means at any reasonable pressure, including a pressure of between 0.3 and 0.5 MPa, since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Kahkoken (US Publication 2014/02388375), Briese (US Patent 4,322,189), Sato (US Publication 2006/0178098) and Junker (US Patent 4,577,440) in further view of Pearson (US Patent 6,042,461). Regarding claim 19, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to specifically disclose the fixed flange is integrally formed as part of the spindle. However, Pearson teaches it is known in the art of mounting assemblies for circular blades with flange assembly for the fixed flange and the end portion of the spindle to be integrally formed. Pearson states in col. 2, line 65 - col. 3, line 3, “[t]he inner flange 30 including the spindle is preferably one piece and machined from a suitable steel. However, it should be appreciated that the inner flange may be of two or more pieces providing the pieces are mounted together to co-rotate, and they may be made of any suitable type of material and my any other suitable method.” The teaching of Pearson suggests individual portions of the flange unit and spindle can be formed as one piece or as separate pieces that are fixed together. It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Pearson such that the fixed flange is integrally formed as part of the spindle since “the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.” In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965)
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Kahkonen (US Publication 2014/02388375), Briese (US Patent 4,322,189) and Nomoto (US Publication 2005/0277377), in further view of Wakita (US Publication 2015/0020670). Regarding claim 20, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes a spindle housing (sawing device 4 with support bearing 15 held in frame 2; schematically depicted in fig. 3 of Kahkonen) that rotatably supports the spindle (e.g., Kahkonen, 5); a gas introduction port (Kahkonen, feed channel 12 and feed chamber 25) formed in the spindle housing (fig. 3). The modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to specifically disclose a second annular groove formed in the outer peripheral surface of the spindle at a position facing the gas introduction port of the spindle housing. However, Wakita teaches it is known in the art of cutting apparatus with an annular blade mounted on a spindle with fluid communication passages to provide an annular groove (642) formed in the outer peripheral surface of the spindle at a position facing a corresponding fluid conduit port (821) in spindle housing (8). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Wakita such that the spindle is provided with an annular groove formed in the outer peripheral surface of the spindle at a position facing the gas introduction port of the spindle housing in order to facilitate continuous fluid flow through the fluid passages during rotation of the spindle.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Kahkonen (US Publication 2014/02388375), Briese (US Patent 4,322,189), Sato (US Publication 2006/0178098) and Junker (US Patent 4,577,440) in further view of Wakita (US Publication 2015/0020670). Regarding claim 21, the modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above includes a spindle housing (sawing device 4 with support bearing 15 held in frame 2; schematically depicted in fig. 3 of Kahkonen) that rotatably supports the spindle (e.g., Kahkonen, 5); a gas introduction port (Kahkonen, feed channel 12 and feed chamber 25) formed in the spindle housing (fig. 3). The modified cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above fails to specifically disclose a second annular groove formed in the outer peripheral surface of the spindle at a position facing the gas introduction port of the spindle housing. However, Wakita teaches it is known in the art of cutting apparatus with an annular blade mounted on a spindle with fluid communication passages to provide an annular groove (642) formed in the outer peripheral surface of the spindle at a position facing a corresponding fluid conduit port (821) in spindle housing (8). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the cutting apparatus of Inoue substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Wakita such that the spindle is provided with an annular groove formed in the outer peripheral surface of the spindle at a position facing the gas introduction port of the spindle housing in order to facilitate continuous fluid flow through the fluid passages during rotation of the spindle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is 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: The closest prior art on the record includes: Omuro (JP2009262251) discloses a cutting apparatus a blade (51) mounted on a spindle (fig. 3) with a spindle housing (53) that includes a vacuum port (59) and a plurality of air ejecting nozzles (70, 75). Omura fails to disclose any features specifically related to the spindle itself. Other than Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Omura represents the ideal base reference from which patentability can be ascertained.
Applicant’s amendment overcomes Lytle (US Patent 301,905) as claim 9 requires a plurality of protruding portion extend radially outward from within the annular groove, wherein the plurality of protruding portions is integrally formed as part of the spindle. The plurality of protruding portions (C) of Lytle are pivotally connected to the spindle in order to press outward when the cutting blade is clamped on the spindle. Thus, Lytle fails to disclose the plurality of protruding portions are integrally formed as part of the spindle. Sato (US Publication 2006/0178098) discloses a cutting apparatus with a spindle (6) with an annular protruding portion (continuous ring protrusion 24) that abuts against the circular opening (32) of annular cutting blade (para. 0025). However, Sato does not disclose the protruding ring projects from an annular groove formed in the outer peripheral surface of the spindle, wherein the first outer peripheral surface formed between the threaded portion and the annular groove and the second outer peripheral surface formed between the fixed flange and the annular groove are of the same diameter.
Nomoto (US Publication 2005/0277377) teaches a cutting apparatus with a spindle having an annular groove formed in the outer peripheral surface thereof but fails to provide any teaching of a plurality of protruding portions extending radially from within the annular groove. As such, the closest prior art on the record fails to disclose or make obvious to combine the features of the cutting apparatus according to claim 1 in combination with the features of claim 9, wherein the spindle includes a plurality of protruding portions extending radially outwardly from within the annular groove, a plurality of holes arranges such that one of said holes is formed between each pair of adjacent ones of said protruding portions, whereby the holes are in combination with the first and second getting passages, and the plurality of protruding portions are integrally formed as part of the spindle and are configured and arranged to abut against the opening portion of the cutting blade.
While many of these features are disclosed separately, the combination of the features depending from the cutting apparatus of claim 1 is not shown to be present in the prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-8, 10-14 and 16-21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Murphy (US Patent 2,167,282) discloses cooling features for a grinding wheel. Todd et al (US Patent 2,182,952) discloses an air conditioned budding and polishing system. Brady (US Patent 2,745,229) discloses a spindle (B) with a helical groove (G). Garrison (US Patent 2,560,944) discloses a cooling system for abrasive wheels including a spindle with an annular groove (29) but fails to disclose a plurality of protruding portions that extend out from within the annular groove to contact the abrasive wheel. Garrison (US Patent 2,826,019) discloses vanes (90) which form projections in an annular groove formed my Golich (US Patent 3,240,243) discloses a mist lubricated ripsaw with a spindle. Christiansen et al (US Patent 3,282,263) discloses a face discharge cutting blade with spindle configured to deliver cooling fluids for discharge; the spindle having a reduced diameter portion (16). Rodach (US Patent 3,782,234) discloses a gripping shaft for a plurality of cutting blades. Betzler (US Patent 3,917,422) discloses a device for centering a rotary tool body on a drive shaft. Robichon (US Patent 5,846,125) discloses a rotary tool with incorporated cooling. Zandonella et al (US Publication 2012/0225615) discloses a spindle for mounting abrasive discs. Zandonella et al (US Publication 2016/0297049) discloses a spindle for mounting a grinding wheel. Liu et al (US Publication 2020/0354903) discloses a water cooling system for a saw blade. Ronaldson (GB 2282258) discloses cooling passages fed through a spindle of a rotary cutting tool, stating on page 2, lines 80-87, “if used in conjunction with a secondary jet at high pressure, directed straight on to the periphery of the wheel at a part of the latter immediately preceding contact with the work, has the effect of providing a better application than would be possible without the mounting means described above.” Ronaldson teaches first and second outer peripheral surfaces of a spindle that have the same diameter. Sun et al (CN 2015813342) discloses a pavement cutter with cutting blade (3) mounted on spindle (1). Fischer (DE102011075967) discloses a tool-holding device for a machine tool.
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 SAMUEL ALLEN DAVIES whose telephone number is (571)270-1511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 9am-5pm 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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571)272-4502. 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.
/SAMUEL A DAVIES/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724 May 19, 2026
/BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights