DETAILED ACTION
Claim Interpretation
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“slide translation mechanism” recited in claim 9
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Due to the invocation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f), the limitation “slide translation mechanism” will be interpreted so as to comprise ‘at least one gear motor assembly,’ as taught by the Specification (paragraph 20), or an equivalent thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1 – 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2012/0266783) in view of Katsuma (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2008/0220922).
As to claim 1, Yoshida teaches a table assembly for a machine tool (abstract), the table assembly comprising a slide translatable on command along a longitudinal axis (figure 1, element 10 being the ‘slide’ and element Y being the ‘longitudinal axis’; paragraphs 20 and 26), a table supported by the slide and rotatable with respect to a vertical axis (figures 1 and 2b, element 12 being the ‘table’ and element C being the ‘vertical axis’; paragraph 21), and a table rotation mechanism placed on board the slide and adapted to be driven to rotate the table about the vertical axis (figure 2b, elements 16 – 24 being the ‘table rotation mechanism’; paragraphs 21 – 25), wherein the table rotation mechanism comprises at least one rotation assembly engaged with a ring gear of the table and comprising a torque motor having a vertical motor axis and a reduction gear having an inlet, engaged with the torque motor, and an outlet pinion, engaged with the ring gear of the table (figure 2b, elements 19 – 24 being the ‘rotation assembly,’ element 18 being the ‘ring gear,’ element 22 being the ‘torque motor,’ element P being the ‘vertical motor axis,’ elements 21, 19, and 20 being the ‘reduction gear,’ lower shaft of element 19 being the ‘inlet,’ and element 20 being the ‘outlet,’ see below; paragraphs 21 – 25).
PNG
media_image1.png
288
543
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, while Yoshida teaches the vertical motor axis being parallel to the outlet pinion (figure 2b, elements P and 20), Yoshida does not teach the vertical motor axis being coaxial with the outlet pinion. Katsuma teaches a table assembly for a machine tool (abstract), the table assembly comprising a table rotatable with respect to a vertical axis (figure 1, element 41 being the ‘table’; paragraph 35), and a table rotation mechanism adapted to be driven to rotate the table about the vertical axis (figure 1, elements 10 and 20 being the ‘table rotation mechanism’; paragraph 35), wherein the table rotation mechanism comprises a rotation assembly engaged comprising a torque motor having a vertical motor axis and a reduction gear having an inlet, engaged with the torque motor, and an outlet pinion (figures 1 and 2, elements 10 and 20 being the ‘rotation assembly,’ element 10 being the ‘torque motor,’ element 20 being the ‘reduction gear,’ element 14 being the ‘inlet,’ and element 24 being the ‘outlet pinion’; paragraphs 44 – 46). Katsuma further teaches that the outlet pinion is coaxial to the motor axis (figure 1, elements 24 and 10). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute the arrangement of the reduction gear and torque motor of Yoshida, wherein the reduction gear is offset from the torque motor, for the arrangement of Katsuma, wherein the reduction gear, including the outlet pinion of the reduction gear, is coaxial with the torque motor, because one skilled in the art would have appreciated that either arrangement provides the benefit of the torque motor driving the reduction gear, as desired by Yoshida.
As to claim 2, Yoshida teaches that the reduction gear of the rotation assembly is an epicyclic reduction gear (figure 2b, element 19 being the ‘epicyclic reduction gear’; paragraph 22). Examiner notes that this can be found because Yoshida teaches the reduction gear being a “conventionally-known planetary gear train type speed reduction unit,” which is a known type of epicyclic reduction gear.
As to claim 3, while Yoshida teaches the reduction gear of the rotation assembly being a epicyclic reduction gear (figure 2b, element 19; paragraph 22), Yoshida does not teach the structure of the epicyclic reduction gear. Katsuma further teaches the reduction gear of the rotation assembly being an epicyclic reduction gear (figure 1, element 20; paragraph 44). Katsuma further teaches the epicyclic reduction gearing comprising a sun gear, planetary gears, a planetary carrier, and a ring gear for reduction gear (figures 1 and 2, element 21 being the ‘sun gear,’ elements 26a – 26d being the ‘planetary gears,’ element 23 being the ‘planetary carrier,’ and element 25 being the ‘ring gear’; paragraphs 44 – 54), and wherein the sun gear is rotatable and engaged with the torque motor (figure 1, elements 21 and 10; paragraph 44), the ring gear for reduction gear is fixed (figures 1 and 2, element 25; paragraph 44), the planetary gears roll on the sun gear and on the ring gear for reduction gear, (figures 1 and 2, elements 26a – 26d, 21, and 25; paragraphs 52 – 54), and the planetary carrier is engaged with the outlet pinion (figures 1 and 2, elements 23 and 24; paragraph 51). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to employ the epicyclic reduction gear of Katsuma for the epicyclic reduction gear of Yoshida, because Katsuma teaches that such an epicyclic reduction gear provides the benefit of reducing the rotation speed of the torque motor (figure 1, elements 20 and 10; paragraph 35), as desired by Yoshida (figure 2b, elements 19 and 22; paragraphs 22 – 23).
As to claim 4, Yoshida taches that the outlet pinion meshes directly with the ring gear of the table (figure 2b, elements 20 and 18; paragraph 22).
As to claim 5, Yoshida teaches an embodiment in which the rotation assembly comprises an idle gear for transmitting motion between the outlet pinion and the ring gear (paragraph 32).
As to claim 6, Yoshida teaches that the at least one rotation assembly comprises two rotation assemblies (figure 2b, elements 19 – 24; paragraph 22), each rotation assembly of the two rotation assemblies being arranged on a respective side of the slide (figure 2b, elements 19 – 24 and 10).
As to claim 7, Yoshida teaches that two torque motors of the two rotation assemblies are configured to be driven in concert (figure 2b, elements 22; paragraph 25).
As to claim 8, Yoshida teaches that the two torque motors of the two rotation assemblies are configured to be driven in opposition (figure 2b, elements 22; paragraph 25).
As to claim 9, Yoshida teaches a slide translation mechanism, comprising a pair of rails, placed on board the slide and adapted to be driven to translate the slide along the longitudinal axis (figure 1, see below).
PNG
media_image2.png
662
777
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 10 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida in view of Katsuma as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Schmidt (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2008/0175684).
As to claim 10, Yoshida does not teach the slide translation mechanism comprising at least one gearmotor assembly. Schmidt teaches a table assembly for a machine tool (abstract), the table assembly comprising a slide translatable on command along a longitudinal axis (figure 1, elements 80 and 81 being the ‘slide’ and direction Y being the ‘longitudinal axis’; paragraph 28); and a slide translation mechanism placed on board the slide and adapted to be driven to translate the slide along the longitudinal axis (paragraph 29, wherein the ‘electrical linear motor’ is the ‘slide translation mechanism’). Schmidt further teaches that the slide translation mechanism comprises at least one gearmotor assembly (paragraph 29). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to provide the slide translation mechanism of Yoshida with the gearmotor assembly of Schmidt, because Schmidt teaches that use of the gearmotor assembly acts to drive the table assembly along the longitudinal axis (paragraph 29), as desired by Yoshida.
As to claim 11, Schmidt teaches that the gearmotor assembly comprises a motor, having a motor axis orthogonal to the longitudinal axis and the vertical axis (paragraph 29), and a reduction gear having an inlet, engaged with the motor, and an outlet, engageable with a rack, coaxial to the motor axis (figures 2, 4, and 5, elements 82, 83, 37, and 38; paragraph 29).
As to claim 12, Schmidt teaches that the at least one gearmotor assembly comprises two gearmotors assemblies arranged on a same side of the slide (figures 2, 4, and 5, elements 82, 83, 37, and 38; paragraph 29).
As to claim 13, Schmidt teaches that the rotation assembly is arranged between said two gearmotor assemblies (figures 2, 4, and 5, elements 82, 83, 37, and 38; paragraph 29).
As to claim 14, Schmidt teaches that the at least one gearmotor assembly comprises two gearmotors assemblies, each of the gearmotor assemblies being arranged on a respective side of the slide (figures 2, 4, and 5, elements 82, 83, 37, and 38; paragraph 29).
As to claim 15, Schmidt teaches that two motors of the two gearmotor assemblies are configured to be driven in opposition (figures 2, 4, and 5, elements 82, 83, 37, and 38; paragraph 29).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 11, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, on pages 7 – 8, that Yoshida in view of Katusma does not teach the limitation of “the torque motor, the reduction gear, and the outlet pinion being ... mounted directly on the slide.” Examiner notes that the claims have been amended so as to require this limitation, as argued by the Applicant.
Applicant further argues, on pages 8 – 9, that it would not have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute the rotation assembly of Yoshida, which is offset from the motor axis, with the rotation axis of Katusma, which is coaxial with the motor axis. Examiner disagrees. It is the position of the Examiner that one skilled in the art would have recognized that either rotation assembly would provide the same benefit of allowing the table of Yoshida to rotate about the vertical axis, as desired by both Yoshida and Katsuma.
Applicant futher argues, on pages 9 – 10, that substituting the rotation assembly of Yoshida with the rotation assembly of Katsuma would destroy the purpose of the rotation assembly of Yoshida. Applicant specifically argues that Yoshida teaches that the rotation assembly provides the benefit of ‘reduces a radius of swing oration about a horizontal axis and a moment of inertia’ (Yoshida, paragraphs 27 – 28). Examiner again disagrees. Yoshida expressly teaches that the benefit of ‘reducing a radius of swing oration about a horizontal axis and a moment of inertia’ is caused by the rotation assembly being located within the slide (paragraphs 27 – 28). Because the rotation assembly of Yoshida in view of Katsuma would allow the rotation assembly to be located within the slide of Yoshida, this benefit would continue to exist.
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 CHRISTOPHER BESLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 am - 7:30 pm (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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J. BESLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights