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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the communications filed on 10/31/2025.
The Examiner notes claims 1-6 are currently pending and have been examined; claim(s) 1 is/are currently amended; claim(s) 6 is/are newly added; and all other claims are original or previously presented.
Please see the Response to Amendments and Response to Arguments sections below for more details.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 6
The claim states "The grinding apparatus according to claim 1, where the center deviation calculating section…" It is unclear whether the center deviation calculating section is a new section or is it intended to be the calculating section from claim 4? For examining purposes the limitation will be interpreted as “The grinding apparatus according to claim [[1]]4,…”
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 & 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball et al. (US 6572444) in view of IWATA HEDEO et al. (JP 2015023239 A), hereinafter Iwata.
Regarding claim 1 (Claim statuses are listed above in the Status of Claims section). Ball discloses a grinding apparatus for grinding a workpiece [Fig 5], the grinding apparatus comprising:
a chuck table [28] rotatable about a predetermined rotational axis [Col2:line6-13; 30 of 28 is rotatable about an axis], the chuck table having a holding surface [30] for holding the workpiece thereon [Col2:line6-13];
a grinding unit [Fig 5; 14, 16, 18, & 20 form a grinding unit] disposed above the chuck table [Fig 5] and having a spindle [16 & 18 form a spindle], wherein a grinding wheel [20] is mounted on a lower end of the spindle [Fig 5] and the grinding wheel includes an annular wheel base [Fig 2; Col2:line17-23 & Col5:line44-48; 40-42 & 47 form an annular wheel base] and a plurality of grindstones [46] disposed circumferentially on a lower surface of the wheel base [Fig 2-3 & 6];
a moving mechanism for moving the chuck table and the grinding unit relative to each other in predetermined directions to bring the holding surface and the grinding wheel closer to each other [Fig 5; 26];
a detector [170] having a housing [Fig 6; 170 has a housing] including a light emitter and a light detector [Fig 6; Col6:line21-39; 176 is an emitter and 178 is a detector, they are described as acoustic but per the cited portion of they can be light emitting/detecting and would function the same],
wherein … the light emitter has a longitudinal axis that is transvers to a lower surface of at least one of the grindstones [Fig 6; 176 has an axis that is transverse to 24] and includes a lens and a light-emitting element, wherein the light-emitting element emits a laser beam through the lens to form a web-shaped laser beam [Fig 6; Col6:line21-39; Ball states that incorporated reference Peckham (US 3815994) discloses a laser beam emitter (14) with a lens (15), see Fig 1 of Peckham; this beam can be applied in a web-shape similar to the acoustical waves shown in Fig 6 of Ball so as to hit 47 & 46 of Ball] … and extending radially along the wheel base [Fig 5; the web-shaped laser beam emitted from 170 extends radially along the wheel base in Fig 5 matching the configuration of 174 in the figure], the web-shaped laser beam being applied to the bottom surface of the at least one of the grindstones and a portion of the lower surface of the wheel base that is adjacent to the at least one of the grindstones radially of the grinding wheel [Fig 6; Col5:line59 – Col6:line2; 176 emits and hits both 46 & 47; specifically 24 of 46 is hit with the light], and
wherein the light detector is positioned at an … angle relative to a longitudinal axis of the at least one of the grindstones [Fig 6; 178 is positioned at an angle of 0 degrees to the longitudinal axis of 46] and includes a condensing lens and a light-detecting element [Fig 6; Col6:line21-39; incorporated reference Peckham (US 3815994) discloses a focusing lens (20), which is a condensing lens, and light-detecting element (23), see Fig 1 & Col3:line1-3 of Peckham], the condensing lens condenses a reflected laser beam reflected off the at least one of the grindstones and the portion of the lower surface of the wheel base [Fig 6; Col5:line59 – Col6:line2; with the lens and light-detecting element incorporated from Peckham, 178 detects emitted 180, 182, or 184 by use of a condensing lens that focuses/condenses the laser beam towards the light-detecting element] such that the condensed reflected laser beam is received by the light-detecting element [Fig 6; Col5:line59 – Col6:line2 & Fig 1; Col3:line1-3 of Peckham]; and
a control unit [27] for controlling the grinding unit, the moving mechanism, and the detector [Fig 5; 27 is connected to and controls the grinding unit, the moving mechanism, and the detector], the control unit having a processor and a memory [Col1:line66; 27 is a computer which has memory and a processor], wherein the control unit includes a holding surface position storing section for storing a relative vertical position of the holding surface with respect to the grinding wheel along the predetermined directions [Col3:line37-52; 27 can have 20 contact 30 and measure the distance with 170 and store it as a holding surface position], a first distance calculating section for calculating a first distance in one of the predetermined directions from the detector to a lower surface of the at least one of the grindstones [Fig 6; 170 can measure the distance from 170 to 46], and a lower surface position calculating section for calculating a position of the lower surface of the at least one of the grindstones with respect to the holding surface on a basis of the relative vertical position of the holding surface stored in the holding surface position storing section and the first distance calculated by the first distance calculating section [Fig 6; Col3:line37-52; 27 can calculate the differences in the holding surface position and the first distance].
Ball is silent in regards to the light emitter has a laser line generator, a web-shaped laser beam having a predetermined length and extending radially along the wheel base, or the light detector being positioned at an acute angle relative to a longitudinal axis of the at least one of the grindstones.
However Iwata teaches a detector [Fig 3 & 8a-8b; 60] for a grinding apparatus [1] that used a light emitter [Fig 3 & 8a-8b; 61 & 62 form a light emitter] the light emitter has a laser line generator [62], a web-shaped laser beam having a predetermined length and extending radially along the wheel base [Fig 8b; ¶23-¶24; 62 forms a web-shaped laser beam (65) that has a predetermined length that extends along the wheel base in a radial direction because 62 is positioned at a predetermined location], and the light detector [Fig 3 & 8a-8b; 63 & 64 form a light detector]; wherein the light detector being positioned at an acute angle relative to a longitudinal axis of the at least one of the grinding wheel [Fig 3 & 8a-8b; 63 & 64 are positioned at an acute angle relative to the longitudinal axis of W].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector as disclosed by Ball to have the light emitter have a laser line generator, a web-shaped laser beam having a predetermined length and extending radially along the wheel base, and the angle of the light detector relative to the longitudinal axis of the grindstones to be acute as taught by Iwata as to detect the distance from the upper surface of W (Wa) and 71 by reflecting light off of both [Iwata: ¶36-¶37] and the acute angle is a known alternative configuration for the alignment of the emitter to the detector [Iwata: Fig 3 & 8a-8b].
Regarding claim 3. Ball as modified teaches the grinding apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the control unit further includes a grinding edge length calculating section for calculating a grinding edge length of the at least one of the grindstones on a basis of a second distance from the detector to the lower surface of the wheel base and the first distance from the detector to the lower surface of the at least one of the grindstones [Ball: Fig 6; Col8:line14-32].
Claim(s) 2 & 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball in view of Iwata further in view of NOMIYA et al. (JP 2008087104 A), hereinafter Nomiya.
Regarding claim 2. Ball as modified teaches the grinding apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising …, wherein when a grindstone of the plurality of grindstones is held in contact with an upper surface of the reference piece … [Ball: Fig 6; Col6:line40-62 and Col7:line35-45; the top of 30 is the reference piece], the relative vertical position in one of the predetermined directions of the holding surface with respect to the grinding wheel is represented by PA [Ball: Fig 6], the thickness from the upper surface of the reference piece to a lower surface is represented by D, and the first distance from the detector to the lower surface of the at least one of the grindstones is represented by B1, and that, when the reference piece is removed from the holding surface, the first distance from the detector to the lower surface of the at least one of the grindstones is represented by Z1, and the lower surface position calculating section calculates the vertical position PC of the lower surface of the at least one of the grindstones with respect to the holding surface when the reference piece is removed from the holding surface, according to the equation (1) Z3 = Z1– (B1– D) ... (1) and the equation (2) PC = PA + Z3 ... (2) [Ball: Fig 6; Col6:line40-62 and Col7:line35-45; a calibration procedure can be performed with 20 being placed a series of distances, which can be performed with a reference piece, and the distances between 170, 24 of 46, & 47 are recorded as well as calculating and recording the distance between 24 and 30 and/or the series of distances (i.e. reference piece)].
Ball as modified is silent in regards to a reference piece placed on the holding surface, wherein when a grindstone of the plurality of grindstones is held in contact with an upper surface of the reference piece placed on the holding surface.
However Nomiya teaches a grinding apparatus calibration apparatus including a reference piece [90] placed on the holding surface [Fig 8-9; 90 is placed on 20], wherein when a grindstone of the plurality of grindstones is held in contact with an upper surface of the reference piece placed on the holding surface [Fig 8; the grinding surface (i.e. grindstone equivalent) is brought into contact with 90].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the grinding apparatus as taught by Ball as modified to have a reference piece placed on the holding surface, wherein when a grindstone of the plurality of grindstones is held in contact with an upper surface of the reference piece placed on the holding surface as taught by Nomiya for the purpose of using a reference piece or gauge that has it height accuracy verified beforehand and can avoid any variations in the holding surface that may develop through the lifecycle of the holding surface [Nomiya: Pg8:¶10 of the translation]
Regarding claim 5. Ball as modified teaches the grinding apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the reference piece includes a stepped surface [Nomiya: Fig 8-10; 90 has a stepped surface].
Claim(s) 4 & 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball in view of Iwata further in view of Yamamoto (US 6467181), hereinafter Yamamoto.
Regarding claim 4. Ball as modified teaches the grinding apparatus according to claim 1, but is silent in regards to wherein the control unit further includes a center deviation calculating section for calculating a deviation between a center of rotation of the spindle and a center of a circle defined by an outer circumferential side surface of the grindstones on a basis of data of the reflected laser beam detected by the detector at a time at which the grinding wheel is rotated about its central axis.
However Yamamoto teaches a detector for a grinding wheel wherein the control unit further includes a center deviation calculating section for calculating a deviation between a center of rotation of the spindle and a center of a circle defined by an outer circumferential side surface of the grindstones on a basis of data of the reflected laser beam detected by the detector at a time at which the grinding wheel is rotated about its central axis [Abstract; Fig 5; Col3:line60 – Col4:line3; as the grinding wheel (14) moves the detector (17) takes two different measurements of the grind wheel’s rotation to calculate it’s center of rotation].
Ball’s detector emits and receives light from the bottom of 24, including their outer circumference, as well as the edge of 47, which is 20’s circumference. These two locations allow 27 to perform the calculations taught by Yamamoto.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the controller and detector as disclosed by Ball as modified to have the control unit further includes a center deviation calculating section for calculating a deviation between a center of rotation of the spindle and a center of a circle defined by an outer circumferential side surface of the grindstones on a basis of data of the reflected laser beam detected by the detector at a time at which the grinding wheel is rotated about its central axis as taught by Yamamoto for the purpose of providing a new method and apparatus to specify a radius of a rotating grindstone, or a device for measuring a radius of grindstone in a grinding machine which exactly measures a radius having a simple structure which does not contact the rotating grindstone [Yamamoto: Col1:line31-35].
Regarding claim 6. Ball as modified teaches the grinding apparatus according to claim 1, where the center deviation calculating section calculates a distance F between a first position of the outer circumferential edge of the lower surface of the grindstone at a time in which the grinding wheel is in a foremost position E2, and a second position of the outer circumferential edge of the lower surface of the grindstone at a time in which the grinding wheel is in a rearmost position E1 [Yamamoto: Fig 4; Abstract; Fig 5; Col3:line60 – Col4:line3; the center deviation calculation section used measurements of the circumference of the outer edge of the grind wheel at two locations to determine the center location and by the distance between the two locations].
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 103 Rejection
Applicant's arguments, see Pages 7-11, filed 10/31/2025 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
The Applicant claims that first, Ball or any of the other prior art disclose or teach “a light emitter has a laser line generator” that “emits a laser beam through a lens to form a web-shaped laser beam having a predetermined length and extending radially along the wheel base.” Second, the Applicant claims that Iwata does teach this but does not disclose or suggest measuring the heights of grindstones on a grinding wheel during operation. Third, The Applicant claims that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not combine Ball and Iwata because Ball does not specifically align its emitter in a direction along the circumference of the grinding wheel. Fourth, The Applicant claims that Iwata does not disclose a light emitter and light detector that applies a laser beam to grindstones or a grindstone wheel and therefore cannot be combined with Ball However as stated above in the rejection Ball measures grindstones on a grinding wheel by use of an emitter and detector, which can be a light/laser emitter and detector. Ball also discloses that the emitter can be aligned with the circumference edge of the grind wheel (i.e. having the emitter laser extend radially along the wheel base), see the rejection above for details. As Ball teaches a laser emitter that measures the height of the one surface in relation to another, Iwata can be combined as it is also measuring the distance between two different surfaces. Additionally Iwata is not relied upon to teach “calculating a position of the lower surface of the at least one of the grindstones with respect to the holding surface;” but does teach having the detector (60) housing the light emitter and light detector being placed on the holding surface, see Fig 1 of Iwata, and would be able to calculate the position of a lower surface with respect to the holding surface. Therefore the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON R MCCONNELL whose telephone number is (303)297-4608. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 0700-1600 MST [0900-1800 EST] 2nd Friday 0700-1500 MST [0900-1700 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 on (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.
/AARON R MCCONNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723