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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/30/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the Amendments/Response filed on July 30, 2026. Claim(s) 1, 8, 15, and 23 have been amended. Claim 26 has been added. Claim(s) 5, 9, and 25 have been cancelled. Claims 1-4, 6-8, 10-24 and 26 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Amendments
The examiner fully acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 8, 15, and 23 filed on July 30, 2026.
The applicant’s amendments to claims 1 and 23 are sufficient to overcome the art of Hall (US Patent No. 410414), applied in the 102 rejection in the previous action. Please see the new rejections which applies Lin (US PG Pub No. 20160175995) set forth in this action.
The applicant’s amendments to claim 15 are sufficient to overcome the art of Hall (US Patent No. 410414), applied in the 103 rejection in the previous action which applied Saxton (US Patent No. 3754436) in view of Hall. Please see the new rejection which applies Lin (US PG Pub No. 20160175995) set forth in this action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6-8 ,10, 13-14, 21-24, 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lin (US PG Pub No. 20160175995).
In regards to claim 1, Lin discloses
a system for mounting a grinder/polisher sample holder, comprising:
a platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6) comprising
a plurality of fasteners, the fasteners each comprising a bore (see fig. 1 - ann. 1);
PNG
media_image1.png
530
1402
media_image1.png
Greyscale
one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) arranged on and mounted to the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6),
the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) configured to secure a sample holder,
the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) comprising:
one or more non-adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) and one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) to fix an orientation or position of the sample holder,
PNG
media_image2.png
530
1398
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the one or more non-adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) and the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) comprise
one or more interfaces (see fig. 1 – ann. 3) to contact and support the sample holder when the sample holder is arranged within the system and wherein the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) are mounted via the fasteners (see fig. 1 – ann. 3),
PNG
media_image3.png
530
915
media_image3.png
Greyscale
the fasteners being distributed about the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6) at a fixed radial distance from a predetermined center point (see fig. 1- ann. 4), and
the predetermined center point (see fig. 1- ann. 4) remains stationary when the mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) are added or removed from the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6); and
one or more columns (see fig. 1 – ann. 4); and
PNG
media_image4.png
530
915
media_image4.png
Greyscale
one or more bracket locks (at least one of stroke units 41 and 51; fig. 1-4 and 6) configured to adjust a position and an orientation of the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) by extending (see column portion of stroke unit; see fig. 2) through the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) and into the one or more columns.
PNG
media_image5.png
405
390
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Note:
The preamble recites a “system for mounting a grinder/polisher sample holder.” It is understood that the phrase “a grinder/polisher sample holder” is a phrase of intended use, see MPEP 2144-II. The apparatus disclosed by Lin, though is not called a “a grinder/polisher sample holder” possesses adjustable members capable of changing position for the purpose of fixing a workpiece during a working/machining process. Therefore, the mounting fixture of Lin is hereinafter interpreted as capable of serving as a “a grinder/polisher sample holder”, meeting therefore the claim limitations.
In regards to claim 4, Lin discloses
the system of claim 1, wherein the arrangement of the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) on the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6) is adjustable based on a size or shape of the sample holder.
[0017] Moreover, the first moveable support 4 is provided with a first displacement structure 43 by which the first moveable support 4 is adjusted in distance between the first moveable support 4 and the first fixing support 2; the second moveable support 5 is provided with a second displacement structure 53 by which the second moveable support 5 is adjusted in distance between the second moveable support 5 and the second fixing support 2.
In regards to claim 6, Lin discloses
the system of claim 1, wherein each mounting fixture further comprises a base portion (see fig. 1 – ann. 5) to mate with the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6); and the column extends from the base portion to support the one or more interface.
PNG
media_image6.png
530
968
media_image6.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 7, Lin discloses
the system of claim 6, wherein the one or more interfaces (the interfaces of adjustable bracket on movable support 5) are mounted to an extension post (fastening parts 522, fig. 1 and 3) extending from the column (laterally, see fig. 3).
PNG
media_image7.png
377
329
media_image7.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 8, Lin discloses
the system of claim 6, wherein the base portion is configured to be secured to the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6) via one or more of the plurality of fasteners (see fig. 1, plurality of fasteners for each base portion).
In regards to claim 10, Lin discloses
the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more interfaces (see fig. 1 – ann. 3) are arranged to contact a first surface of the sample holder to limit movement of the sample holder in a first direction, and the adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) are configured to contact a second surface of the sample holder to limit movement of the sample holder in a second direction.
In regards to claim 13, Lin discloses
the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) support the sample holder at a distance from a surface of the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6) that is greater than a length of a sample holder drive adapter.
Examiner’s Note: As the mounting fixture disclosed by Lin provides elements that are laterally and vertically adjustable, they would accommodate clearance for the sample holder adapter. While Lin doesn’t disclose a sample holder drive adapter, supporting workpieces with different geometries is considered functional language, and as Lin is adjustable, it would be capable of providing clearance beneath the sample holder.
In regards to claim 14, Lin discloses
the system of claim 1, wherein the system is configured to be incorporated in a hardness testing machine.
Examiner’s Note: The examiner is understanding “configured to be incorporated” as functional language. Since the Work holder described by Tiede has interfaces, adjustable fixtures, and a platform, it’s understood as being able to hold a piece during work during a hardness test.
In regards to claim 21, Lin discloses
the system of claim 1, wherein each of the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) define an adjustable mounting bracket receiving hole(displacement slot 21, fig. 2) extending from an inwardly-facing mounting interface of the adjustable mounting bracket to an outwardly- facing locking interface (surface of stroke unit 41, 51; see fig. 1) of the adjustable mounting bracket.
In regards to claim 22, Lin discloses
the system of claim 1, further comprising one or more second mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) configured to secure the sample holder, each second mounting fixture comprises:
one or more mounting brackets (see fig. 1 – ann. 2) to fix the orientation or position of the sample holder; and one or more second interfaces (see fig. 1 – ann. 3) to contact and support the sample holder within the system.
In regards to claim 23, Lin discloses
a system for mounting a grinder/polisher sample holder, comprising: a platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6) comprising a plurality of fasteners, the fasteners each comprising a bore (see fig. 1 - ann. 1); one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) arranged on and mounted to the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6), the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) configured to secure a sample holder, the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) comprising:
one or more non-adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) and one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) to fix an orientation or position of the sample holder,
wherein the one or more non-adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) and the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) comprises one or more interfaces to contact and support the sample holder when the sample holder is arranged within the system wherein the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) are mounted via the fasteners, the fasteners being arranged at a fixed radial distance from a predetermined center point (see fig. 1- ann. 3) to evenly distribute a force exerted on the one or more non-adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) and the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) during a hardness test; and
one or more columns; and
one or more bracket locks (at least one of stroke units 41 and 51; fig. 1-4 and 6) configured to adjust a position and an orientation of the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) by extending through the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) and into the one or more columns.
Examiner’s Note:
The limitation of “to evenly distribute a force exerted on the one or more non-adjustable mounting brackets and the one or more adjustable mounting brackets during a hardness test” an intended use limitation. Pursuant MPEP 2114.II, "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.
In regards to claim 24, Lin discloses
the system of claim 23, further comprising an alignment device (centrally provided fifth clamping part 11, fig. 1 and 4) wherein the alignment device ensures consistent orientation of the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6) in a hardness testing system.
Examiner’s Note:
The limitation of “ensures consistent orientation of the platform in a hardness testing system” is intended used. Pursuant MPEP 2114.II, the claim limitations are disclosed as Lin discloses the structural limitations of the claim.
In regards to claim 26, Lin discloses
the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more fasteners are configured to receive at least one of a post, a dowel, or a bolt (first or second displacement structure, located in the fastener, shown in figures as at least a post or bolt; see fig. 1 – ann. 6)).
PNG
media_image8.png
530
915
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin.
In regards to claim 2, Lin discloses
the system of claim 1, but fails to explicitly state that the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) comprises three or more fixtures distributed about the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6) at “an equal radial distance from the center point.”
However, Lin discloses that the fixture supports (at least 4 and 5) are mounted via a displacement structure which allows for adjusting the distance between moveable supports and fixed supports ([0017]).
Therefore, pursuant of MPEP 2144.VI.C, changing the positioning of the adjustable fixtures in order to accommodate proper securing of a workpiece, such that the distances were of equal radial distances from the center point, would be an obvious matter of design choice.
In regards to claim 3, Lin discloses
the system of claim 2, but fails to explicitly disclose each mounting fixture of the one or more mounting fixtures is separated by an equal distance between axial positions.
However, Lin discloses that the fixture supports (at least 4 and 5) are mounted via a displacement structure which allows for adjusting the distance between moveable supports and fixed supports ([0017]).
Therefore, pursuant of MPEP 2144.VI.C, changing the positioning of the adjustable fixtures in order to accommodate proper securing of a workpiece, such that the distances were of equal distance between axial points, would be an obvious matter of design choice.
Claim(s) 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Hohwart (US Patent No. 3459433)..
In regards to claim 11,
the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) are formed of a metal such as stainless steel.
Lin fails to disclose the mounting fixtures are formed “of a metal such as stainless steel.” However, Hohwart teaches “Each jaw 32 comprises a plain, solid block of metal formed with a dovetail rib or tenon which slidably fits in the dovetail groove of the respective jaw-mounting base 35 (col. 4 lines 8-11).”
Lin and Hohwart are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of work holders with adjustable members for adapting to different sized pieces.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Hohwart and form the mounting fixture of metal, as metal is well known for its durable and sturdy construction, making it capable of surviving multiple uses when testing for hardness.
In regards to claim 12,
the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more interfaces are formed of a hardened material, such as carbide or steel.
Lin fails to disclose the interfaces are formed “of a hardened material, such as carbide or steel.”
However, Hohwart teaches “Each jaw 32 comprises a plain, solid block of metal formed with a dovetail rib or tenon which slidably fits in the dovetail groove of the respective jaw-mounting base 35(col. 4 lines 8-11).”
Lin and Hohwart are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of work holders with adjustable members for adapting to different sized pieces.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Hohwart and provide mounting fixtures, which includes the interface, as formed of metal, as metal is well known for its durable and sturdy construction, making it capable of surviving multiple uses when testing for hardness.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saxton (US Patent No. 3754436) in view of Lin (US PG Pub No. 20160175995).
In regards to claim 15, Saxton discloses
a hardness testing system (hardness testing apparatus A, fig. 1-2), comprising:
a grinder/polisher sample holder (worktable 50, fig. 1-2), and
a system for mounting a grinder/polisher sample holder (worktable 50, fig. 1-2).
Saxton fails to disclose the sample holder as claimed.
However, Lin discloses:
a platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6) comprising
a plurality of fasteners, the fasteners each comprising a bore (see fig. 1 - ann. 1);
PNG
media_image1.png
530
1402
media_image1.png
Greyscale
one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) arranged on and mounted to the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6),
the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) configured to secure a sample holder,
the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) comprising:
one or more non-adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) and one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) to fix an orientation or position of the sample holder,
wherein the one or more non-adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) and the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) comprise
one or more interfaces (see fig. 1 – ann. 3) to contact and support the sample holder when the sample holder is arranged within the system and wherein the one or more mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) are mounted via the fasteners (see fig. 1 – ann. 3),
the fasteners being distributed about the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6) at a fixed radial distance from a predetermined center point (see fig. 1- ann. 4), and
the predetermined center point (see fig. 1- ann. 4) remains stationary when the mounting fixtures (at least first fixing support 2, second fixing support, first moveable support 4, and second movable support 5; fig. 1-4 and 6) are added or removed from the platform (platform 1, fig. 1, 5, 6); and
one or more columns (see fig. 1 – ann. 4); and
one or more bracket locks (at least one of stroke units 41 and 51; fig. 1-4 and 6) configured to adjust a position and an orientation of the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) by extending (see column portion of stroke unit; see fig. 2) through the one or more adjustable mounting brackets (see fig. 1 - ann. 2) and into the one or more columns.
Saxton and Lin are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of workholder devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Saxton to incorporate the teachings of Lin and provide a workholder capable of adapting to pieces as each would simply perform their respective functions in a predictable manner. Saxton would complete hardness testing, and Lin would be the holder of the workpiece undergoing the process.
In regards to claim 16, Saxton as modified discloses
the hardness testing system of claim 15, further comprising a platen (circular member 52, fig. 1-2) configured for mounting the system for mounting a grinder/polisher sample holder (worktable 50, fig. 1-2).
PNG
media_image9.png
616
799
media_image9.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 17, Saxton as modified discloses
the hardness testing system of claim 16, wherein the system for mounting a grinder/polisher sample holder (worktable 50, fig. 1-2) further comprises one or more alignment devices (see annotated fig. 2) configured to mate with one or more alignment devices at the platen (circular member 52, fig. 1-2).
PNG
media_image10.png
616
799
media_image10.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 18, Saxton as modified discloses
the hardness testing system of claim 15, further comprising an indenture device (indenter ball 36, fig. 1-2) to test hardness of a sample within the sample holder (worktable 50, fig. 1-2) by impacting the sample.
In regards to claim 19, Saxton as modified discloses
the hardness testing system of claim 18, further comprising a movable stage (see annotated fig. 2; col. 2 lines 44-48: Fluid is supplied to the double-acting motor to raise or lower the worktable 50 through conduits 110, 112 by a pump 114 driven by an electric motor 116 under the control of a solenoid operated, four-way valve 118)
PNG
media_image11.png
616
617
media_image11.png
Greyscale
upon which the platen (circular member 52, fig. 1-2) is secured, the movable stage (see annotated fig. 2) configured to adjust a position (col. 2 lines 44-48) or orientation of the sample relative to the indenture device (indenter ball 36, fig. 1-2).
In regards to claim 20, Saxton as modified discloses
the hardness testing system of claim 16, wherein the platen (circular member 52, fig. 1-2) further comprises one or more alignment devices (plunger 54, fig. 1-2) to mate (col. 2 lines 12-20: An article to be tested, such as the article W, is positioned on the upper side of a worktable 50 detachably connected to a circular member 52 which member is in turn detachably connected to the upper end of a vertically extending plunger 54 formed integral with a piston 56 slidably supported in a counterbore 60 in the lower end of a vertically extending cylinder 62 detachably connected to the underside of the plate 20 of the base 16) with the platform (work piece fixture 20, fig. 1-8).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON KHALIL HAWKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-5446. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 8-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JASON KHALIL HAWKINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights