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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed April 29, 2025 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.98(a)(4) because it lacks the appropriate size fee assertion, and also fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97(a) because it lacks the appropriate size fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(v). It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Note that while the IDS filed 4/29/2025 does include a statement that “No IDS fee is required under 37 CFR 1.17(v) at this time”, such is not the appropriate size fee assertion, given that the number of references cited on the IDS filed April 29, 2025 would cause the total number of references cited to exceed the 50-reference first threshold. (Prior to the 4/29/2025 IDS, the reference count was 43 references, and the 4/29/2025 IDS would take the count to 54 references. Additionally note that the 4/29/2025 IDS was filed after January 19, 2025, which is the effective date of the IDS size fee rule in 37 CFR 1.17(v) and the amendments to 37 CFR 1.97(a), 1.98(a)(4) and 1.555(a) to require the IDS size fee and size fee assertion.) Consequently, the IDS filed 4/29/2025 was (additionally) deficient because it did not include the IDS size fee under 37 CFR 1.17(v)(1).
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed August 19, 2025 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.98(a)(4) because it lacks the appropriate size fee assertion. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Note that the 8/19/2025 IDS does not include any sort of size fee assertion whatsoever.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
the ball screw of claim 4; and
the combination of limitations set forth in claim 12 (including both: (i) the guide mount assembly that is configured to receive and adjustably move a saw guide between an upper position and a lower position, and (ii) the one or more laser range finders configured as recited in claim 12; note that it appears that for the embodiment of Figure 18 that is shown with the laser range finders 120, that embodiment does not include the guide mount assembly that is configured to receive and adjustably move a saw guide 50 between an upper position and a lower position).
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
in paragraph 0068, it appears that both occurrences of “proximity switch 46” should be changed to –proximity switch 47—to be consistent with paragraph 0067, with the rest of paragraph 0068, and with Figures 4-5, for example.
Appropriate correction is required.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, drawn to a “guide dresser for milling”, and regarding Category (A) (regarding the orientation of the fixed non-horizontal ais of movement of the saw guide), subspecies (A)(i) (a first subspecies in which the fixed non-horizontal axis of movement of the saw guide between the upper position and the lower position is parallel to a vertical plane), and regarding Category (B) (regarding the configuration of the rail or slide system on which the first and second cutter assemblies are mounted), subspecies (B)(ii) (a second subspecies in which the rail or slide system on which the first and second cutter assemblies are mounted comprises a first rail or slide apparatus having the first cutter assembly slidably mounted thereon, and having a second rail or slide apparatus having the second cutter assembly slidably mounted thereon), in the reply filed on March 16, 2026, is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 10, 15, and 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and/or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on March 16, 2026.
Comment on Claim Language
It is noted that the present specification sets forth a number of special definitions. For example, it is noted that the claim term “rail or slide system” was provided with the following special definition in paragraph [0055] of the specification as filed:
By “rail or slide system”, it is meant to refer to any arrangement of components that allow for movement of the first and second cutter assemblies (20, 30).
Additionally, it is noted that the term “saw guide rail or slide assembly” was provided with the following special definition in paragraph [0066] of the specification as filed:
By “saw guide rail or slide assembly”, it is meant to refer to any arrangement of components that allow for movement of the saw guide 50 between the upper and lower positions.
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 1-9, 11-14, and 16-17 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 1, lines 12-14, the claim sets forth “wherein both the first cutter assembly and the second cutter assembly are positioned away from the guide mount assembly on the rail system when in the open position”. However, firstly, it is unclear as claimed what is being set forth as “on the rail system”, e.g., the guide mount assembly, the positioning of the first cutter assembly and second cutter assembly, or the first and second cutter assemblies themselves. Additionally, it is unclear as set forth in the limitation “when in the open position” what is being set forth as being in the open position, e.g., the first and second cutter assemblies, the rail system, the guide mount assembly, etc., i.e., when what is in the open position?
Additionally, it is noted that “the rail system” (in claim 1, lines 13-14, and in claim 1, lines 15-16) lacks sufficient clear antecedent basis in the claim, noting that a/the “rail or slide system” is previously set forth in at least line 2 of claim 1, and it is not inherent that “system” is part of the “rail” limitation (particularly given the special definition of the term “rail or slide system”, as a whole, found in paragraph 0055 of the specification as filed; e.g., it is not inherent that “rail or slide system” is “rail system or slide system”, as opposed to “slide system or rail”).
In claim 1, lines 14-16, the claim sets forth “wherein both the first cutter assembly and the second cutter assembly are proximal to the guide mount assembly on the rail system when in the closed position”. However, firstly, it is unclear as claimed what is being set forth as “on the rail system”, e.g., the guide mount assembly, the positioning of the first cutter assembly and second cutter assembly, or the first and second cutter assemblies themselves. Additionally, it is unclear as set forth in the limitation “when in the closed position” what is being set forth as being in the closed position, e.g., the first and second cutter assemblies, the rail system, the guide mount assembly, etc., i.e., when what is in the closed position?
In claim 1, penultimate line, it is unclear as set forth in the claim to what “it” is intended to refer.
In claim 1, last three lines, the claim sets forth “such that both the first and second rotatable cutter heads are capable of contacting the saw guide when it is received on the guide mount assembly and is in or is moved to the lower position”. However, it is unclear as claimed whether this limitation is intended to just be a (stand-alone) statement of a capability of the first and second cutter heads, or whether this is intended to go with “when in the closed position” from the fourth (from the end) to the third lines from the end of claim 1. That said, accordingly, in the event that the former is intended, then it is noted that the term “proximal” would be a relative term or term of degree which renders the claim indefinite. The term “proximal” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear how close the first and second cutter assemblies must be to the guide mount assembly in order to be considered “proximal” thereto, and how far away they must be in order to be considered to be excluded by the term.
In claim 2, the claim sets forth “wherein the guide mount assembly comprises a mount apparatus and a saw guide rail or slide assembly…”. However, it is unclear as claimed to what the alternative limitation “or slide assembly” is intended to be alternative. For example, it is unclear as claimed whether the claim intends to recite “wherein the guide mount assembly comprises a mount apparatus and a saw guide rail or” (wherein the guide mount assembly comprises) “a slide assembly” (in which case, the mount apparatus is not required in the event the limitation “slide assembly” is met), vs. whether the claim intends to recite “wherein the guide mount assembly comprises a mount apparatus and” (one of) “a saw guide rail or a slide assembly” (in which case the mount apparatus is required, regardless of which of the saw guide rail or slide assembly alternatives are met). Furthermore, it is unclear as claimed in claim 2 (as well as in claims 3-5 and 7) whether “assembly” is intended to go with only “slide”, or whether “assembly” is also intended to go with “saw guide rail” (in the limitation “saw guide rail or slide assembly”).
In claim 2, the claim recites “wherein the guide mount assembly comprises a mount apparatus and a saw guide rail or slide assembly interconnected to the mount apparatus and configured for receiving the saw guide”. However, it is unclear as claimed whether “interconnected to the mount apparatus and configured for receiving the saw guide” is intended to go only with “slide assembly”, or whether “interconnected to the mount apparatus and configured for receiving the saw guide” is also intended to go with “saw guide rail” (or “saw guide rail…assembly”, in the event that “assembly” is intended to also go with “saw guide rail”).
In claim 3, the claim sets forth “wherein the saw guide rail or slide assembly comprises a saw guide carriage slidably mounted thereon for receiving the saw guide”. However, noting that claim 3 indicates that the “saw guide rail or slide assembly comprises a saw guide carriage”, i.e., the saw guide carriage is part of the saw guide rail or slide assembly, it is unclear how or in what regard the saw guide carriage (as claimed) is to be considered to be mounted on itself (“wherein the saw guide rail or slide assembly comprises a saw guide carriage slidably mounted thereon”, i.e., on the saw guide rail or slide assembly of which the saw guide carriage is a part, i.e., on itself).
In claim 11, the claim recites “wherein one or both of movement between the open position and the closed position and movement between the upper position and the lower position is independently, in whole or in part, an automatic operation.” However, firstly, it is unclear as claimed what is moving re the “movement between the open position and the closed position”, and re the “movement between the upper position and the lower position”, and it is not clear if such is intended to be any movement of anything between the claimed open and closed positions and between the claimed upper and lower positions, or whether movement of specific elements is intended to be required. Additionally, it appears that the claim is missing some verbiage re the “independently” limitation, i.e., independently of what? Furthermore, it is unclear as claimed whether “independently” is intended to go only with “movement between the upper position and the lower position”, or whether such is also intended to go with “movement between the open position and the closed position”. Also, in the limitation “wherein one or both…”, it is unclear as claimed whether such alternative is intended to mean “one or both of movement between the open position and closed position” (i.e., the “both” would be both the open and closed positions), or whether such alternative is instead intended to refer to (i) movement between the open position and the closed position, and (ii) movement between the upper position and the lower position (i.e., the “both” would be both (i) between open and closed positions and (ii) between upper and lower positions). Additionally, it is unclear as claimed whether “in whole or in part” is intended to go with “independently”, or is instead intended to go with “an automatic operation”.
In claim 13, the claim recites “wherein each of the first cutter assembly and the second cutter assembly comprise a pivot component for independently adjusting alignment of the first rotatable cutter head and the second rotatable cutter head”. However, it is unclear as claimed how many pivot components are intended to be recited, e.g., one vs. two, i.e., (i) the first and second cutter assemblies collectively include one pivot component, total, that is “for independently adjusting alignment of” both the first and second rotatable cutter heads, vs. (ii) the first cutter assembly comprises one pivot component for independently adjusting alignment of the first rotatable cutter head, and the second cutter assembly comprises another pivot component that is for independently adjusting alignment of the second rotatable cutter head. Note that this is further unclear in that the specification appears to teach and show option (ii) (two pivot components), whereas claim 14 refers back to “the pivot component” (previously recited in claim 13) as if it were one pivot component. That said, it appears that the limitation “the pivot component” in claim 14 lacks clear antecedent basis in the claim.
In claim 17, the claim recites “wherein in operation: the saw guide is received onto the guide mount assembly in the lower position when the first and second cutter assemblies are in the open position”. However, it is unclear as claimed the limitation “the saw guide is received onto the guide mount assembly in the lower position” what is being set forth as being “in the lower position”, e.g., the guide mount assembly, or the saw guide. In other words, “the saw guide is received onto the guide mount assembly” when what is “in the lower position”?
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In claim 13, the claim recites “wherein each of the first cutter assembly and the second cutter assembly comprise a pivot component for independently adjusting alignment of the first rotatable cutter head and the second rotatable cutter head”. However, as noted in a separate rejection of claim 13 above under 35 USC 112(b), it is unclear as claimed how many pivot components are intended to be recited, e.g., one vs. two, i.e., (i) the first and second cutter assemblies collectively include one pivot component, total, that is “for independently adjusting alignment of” both the first and second rotatable cutter heads, vs. (ii) the first cutter assembly comprises one pivot component for independently adjusting alignment of the first rotatable cutter head, and the second cutter assembly comprises another pivot component that is for independently adjusting alignment of the second rotatable cutter head. Note that this is further made unclear in that the specification appears to teach and show option (ii) (two pivot components), whereas claim 14 refers back to “the pivot component” (previously recited in claim 13) as if it were one pivot component. That said, it appears that the limitation “the pivot component” in claim 14 lacks clear antecedent basis in the claim.
In any event, the specification as filed does not appear to teach, in a manner so as to demonstrate possession thereof, an arrangement in which each of the first cutter assembly (20_ and the second cutter assembly (30) (collectively) comprise “a” (i.e., one) pivot component that if “for independently adjusting alignment of the first rotatable cutter head” (22) “and the second rotatable cutter head” (32), as set forth in claim 13. Furthermore, the specification as filed does not appear to teach, in a manner so as to demonstrate possession thereof, one pivot component that “aligns the first and second rotatable cutter heads” (22 and 32), as set forth in claim 14.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-3, 7-9, 11, 13-14, and 16-17, as best understood in view of the above rejection(s) based on 35 USC 112, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0029567 A1 to Hessbrueggen (hereinafter, “Hessbrueggen”).
Hessbrueggen teaches a guide dresser for (i.e., capable of) milling (paragraph 0001) a saw guide (it is noted that the machining apparatus/guide “dresser” is considered to be at least inherently capable of milling a “saw guide”, noting that the tools, including the milling tools taught in at least paragraph 0001, are blind as to the workpiece which they machine, but rather are inherently capable of machining whatever workpiece with which they are brought into operative machining contact, by virtue of the machining portion(s) of the tooling in question), the guide dresser comprising:
a rail or slide system (including guide rails 16 and/or slides 15; see Figures 3-3c, as well as at least paragraphs 0007, 0016, 0018-0019, and 0020, for example);
a first cutter assembly (including at least tool holder 10 or 10’, and the tools 14, 14’ mounted thereon; see Figures 3-3c as well as at least paragraphs 0007, 0016-0021, for example) slidably mounted on the (aforedescribed) rail or slide system (see Figures 3-3c and at least paragraphs 0007, 0016, 0018-0019, and 0020, for example), the first cutter assembly having a first rotatable cutter head (such as, for example, 10 or 10’, which rotates/pivots about an axis 17, or alternatively, such as the rotary tool mount on 10 or 10’ and to which the rotary tools 14 for milling/machining/drilling are provided; see Figures 3-3c, paragraphs 0001, 0007, 0016-0022, and 0025for example);
a second cutter assembly (including at least whichever of 10 or 10’ that is not considered part of the first cutter assembly, in combination with the tools 14, 14’ mounted thereon; see Figures 3-3c as well as at least paragraphs 0007, 0016-0021, for example) slidably mounted on the (aforedescribed) rail or slide system (see Figures 3-3c and at least paragraphs 0007, 0016, 0018-0019, and 0020, for example), the second cutter assembly having a second rotatable cutter head (such as, for example, 10 or 10’, which rotates/pivots about an axis 17, or alternatively, such as the rotary tool mount on 10 or 10’ and to which the rotary tools 14 for milling/machining/drilling are provided; see Figures 3-3c, paragraphs 0001, 0007, 0016-0022, and 0025for example); and
a guide mount assembly (8, and/or one or more of 9, 19, 6’, optionally also 1; see Figures 3-3c, as well as at least paragraphs 0007, 0017-0022, for example) configured to receive and adjustably move a saw guide (workpiece) between an upper position and a lower position (see Figures 3-3c, noting that 9 is vertically movable along rails 19 via actuator 6’; see also paragraphs 0007, 0017-0022, for example), the upper position being above the (aforedescribed) first and (aforedescribed) second rotatable cutter heads (see Figures 3, 3a, and 3c, for example, especially Figure 3a, noting that the headstock 9 is able to be vertically moved upwardly along rails 19 to a position, such as that shown in Figure 3a, at which the workpiece 7 is above/higher than the aforedescribed cutter heads; see also at least paragraphs 0020-0021, for example) and the lower position being “between” the (aforedescribed) first and (aforedescribed) second rotatable cutter heads (see Figures 3-3c, and especially Figure 3b, noting that the headstock 9 is able to be moved downwardly along rails 19 to a position, such as that shown in any of Figures 3-3c, but especially in Figure 3b, at which the workpiece 7 is “between”, such as in the left/right horizontal direction re Figures 3-3c, the aforedescribed first and second cutter heads; note that in all of the positions of 7 shown in Figures 3-3c, the workpiece 7 is “between”, in the aforedescribed left/right horizontal direction, the cutter heads), wherein the guide dresser is adjustable between an open position and a closed position by slidable movement (in the horizontal left/right direction re Figures 3-3c, as 15 slides along 16) of the (aforedescribed) first cutter assembly, the (aforedescribed) second cutter assembly, or both, wherein both the (aforedescribed) first cutter assembly and the (aforedescribed) second cutter assembly are positioned away from the guide mount assembly on the rail system (16 and/or 15) when in the open position, and wherein both the first cutter assembly and the second cutter assembly are positioned proximal to the guide mount assembly on the rail system when (the guide dresser is) in the closed position (see Figures 3-3c, noting that the aforedescribed cutter assemblies are capable of being moved between such open and closed positions, simply by moving 15 and 10, 10’ away from each other along rails 16 to an “open” position and/or by moving 15 and 10, 10’ towards each other along rails 16 to a “closed” position; see Figures 3-3c and at least paragraphs 0007, 0016, 0018-0022), such that both the (aforedescribed) first and (aforedescribed) second rotatable cutter heads are capable of contacting the saw guide (workpiece) when it is received on the guide mount assembly (8 and/or one or more of 9, 19, 6’, optionally also 1) and is in or is moved to the (aforedescribed) lower position (simply by moving 15 and 10, 10’ along 16 towards one another re Figures 3-3c to a position at which both of the cutter heads, and particularly the tools 14, 14’ thereof, are capable of contacting the workpiece held by 9, for example; see Figures 3-3c and paragraphs 0007 and 0016-0022, for example).
Regarding claim 2, the guide mount assembly (8 and/or one or more of 9, 19, 6’, optionally also 1) comprises a mount apparatus (1, or alternatively, 19, for example) and a saw guide rail or slide assembly (19+6’+the ball screw driven by 6’ as taught by at least paragraphs 0016, 0007, and 0017, in the event that the mount apparatus is 1; alternatively, 9+6’+ the aforementioned ball screw driven by 6’, in the event that the mount apparatus is or includes 19) interconnected to the mount apparatus and configured for receiving the saw guide (i.e., workpiece). See Figures 3-3c and at least paragraphs 0007, 0017-0022, for example.
Regarding claim 3, the saw guide rail or slide assembly (19+6’+ball screw or 9+6’+ball screw, as discussed above re claim 2) comprises a saw guide carriage (9) slidably mounted “thereon” (insofar as such is best understood in view of the above rejections based on 35 USC 112) for receiving the saw guide (workpiece). See Figures 3-3c and at least paragraphs 0007, 0017-0022, for example.
Regarding claim 7, the (aforedescribed) saw guide rail or slide assembly is “aligned” (as broadly claimed) for slidable movement of the saw guide (workpiece) between the (aforedescribed) upper position and the (aforedescribed) lower position along a fixed non-horizontal axis (specifically, note that the workpiece held by 9 moves along a “fixed non-horizontal” vertical axis as 9 moves along 19; see Figures 3-3c and at least paragraphs 0007 and 0016-0022, for example).
Regarding claim 8, the (aforedescribed re claim 7) fixed non-horizontal (vertical) axis is parallel to a vertical plane “defined by” a horizontal axis along which slidable movement of the (aforedescribed) first and second cutter assemblies occurs (as the aforedescribed cutter assemblies move along rails 16 in the left/right horizontal direction re Figures 3-3c). See Figures 3-3c, and particularly Figure 3, noting that the plane of the figure re Figure 3 is a vertical plane that is parallel to the aforedescribed vertical axis of movement of 9 (and thus of the workpiece held thereby) as 9 moves along rails 19, and also noting that the plane of the figure re Figure 3 is “defined by” the horizontal left/right direction of Figure 3.
Regarding claim 9, each of the (aforedescribed) upper position and lower position of the saw guide (workpiece held on 9) are between (at least in the left/right horizontal direction re Figures 3-3c) the (aforedescribed) first cutter assembly and the second cutter assembly. See Figures 3-3c, for example.
Regarding claim 11, one or both of movement between the (aforedescribed) open position and the (aforedescribed) closed position and movement between the (aforedescribed) upper position and the (aforedescribed) lower position is “independently, in whole or in part, an automatic operation”, as broadly claimed. Note that the movement of 10 in the left/right horizontal direction along guides 16 is independent from (and at least partly automated) the movement of 10’ in the left/right horizontal direction, as can be seen in at least Figures 3, 3a-3c. Additionally, note that the movement of 9 and the workpiece attached thereto in the vertical direction along 19 (via motor 6’ and ball screw drive; see at least paragraphs 0007, 0016-0017, 0020-0021) is “independent” from the movements of 10, 10’, and is at least partly automated (e.g., via motor 6’). As a side note, it is noted that it appears that only one of the alternatives is required to meet the claim language.
Regarding claim 13, each of the (aforedescribed) first cutter assembly and the (aforedescribed) second cutter assembly comprise a pivot component (noting the pivot axes 17 of 10, 10’) for independently adjusting “alignment” (as broadly claimed) of the first rotatable cutter head and the second rotatable cutter head. See Figures 3-3c and at least paragraphs 0007, 0016, 0018, 0021, for example.
Regarding claim 14, when in operation if a vertical positioning of the saw guide (i.e., workpiece) is “skewed” from a vertical direction, the pivot component aligns (i.e., is capable of “aligning”, as broadly claimed) the first and second rotatable cutter heads (with some axis or frame of reference). Note that whether the vertical positioning of the workpiece is or is not “skewed from a vertical direction”, the aforedescribed pivot component (for achieving the pivot axes 17, 17) is capable of performing the claimed function of “aligning” the first and second rotatable cutter heads with some unspecified-in-the-claim frame of reference, simply by pivoting 10 and/or 10’ about their respective pivot axis 17 to thus “align” some unspecified-in-the-claim frame of reference of the cutter head(s) with some unspecified-in-the-claim frame of reference (such as an imaginary axis with which the pivoting causes the unspecified-in-the-claim frame of reference of the cutter head(s) to be “aligned”), as broadly claimed.
Regarding claim 16, the (aforedescribed) rail or slide system (16 and/or 15) comprises a first rail or slide apparatus (either the 16 and/or 15 associated with 4, or the 16 and/or 15 associated with 4’; see Figure 3) having the (aforedescribed) first cutter assembly slidably mounted thereon and a second rail or slide apparatus (the other of the 16 and/or 15 associated with 4, vs. the 16 and 15 associated with 4’) having the (aforedescribed) second cutter assembly slidably mounted thereon. See Figures 3-3c and at least paragraphs 0007, and 0016-0022, for example.
Regarding claim 17, in operation: the saw guide (workpiece) is (capable of being) received onto the (aforedescribed) guide mount assembly in the (aforedescribed) lower position when the (aforedescribed) first and second cutter assemblies are in the (aforedescribed) open position (see Figure 3, for example); the saw guide (workpiece) is (capable of being) moved to the (aforedescribed) upper position (simply by moving 9 upwardly along 19 to the upper position, as described above re claim 1), thereby (the guide dresser being capable of) activating the (aforedescribed) first and second cutter assemblies to the (aforedescribed) closed position (simply by causing the left and right cutter assemblies to move along rails 16 towards one another, as described above re claim 1; see Figures 3-3c); and the saw guide (workpiece) is (capable of being) moved downward (as 9 is moved downward along rails 19) “towards” the (aforedescribed) lower position once the (aforedescribed) first and second cutter assemblies are in the (aforedescribed) closed position, thereby milling the saw guide (via the milling tools of the tools 14, see Figures 3-3c and at least paragraphs 0001, 0007, 0016-0023, for example, noting that the workpiece is considered to be capable of such movement when the various elements are in the claimed position(s), simply by actuated the motor 6’ to cause the downward movement of 9 and the workpiece when the cutter assemblies are in the claimed position and when milling tools of the tools 14 have been pivoted, about axis 17 via such pivoting of 10, 10’, to a position so as to be able to contact the workpiece).
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 4, as best understood in view of the above rejection(s) based on 35 USC 112, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0029567 A1 to Hessbrueggen (hereinafter, “Hessbrueggen”) as applied to at least claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of the Non-Patent-Literature article “Understanding Servo Motors and Servo Drives” by Atin Chhabra (hereinafter, “Chhabra”).
Hessbrueggen teaches all aspects of the presently-claimed invention as were described in the above rejection(s) based thereon.
Additionally, regarding claim 4, Hessbrueggen teaches that the saw guide rail or slide assembly (19+6’+the ball screw driven by 6’ as taught by at least paragraphs 0016, 0007, and 0017, in the event that the mount apparatus is 1; alternatively, 9+6’+ the aforementioned ball screw driven by 6’, in the event that the mount apparatus is or includes 19) comprises a motor (motor 6’) controlled ball screw (see paragraphs 0016, 0007, and 0017, as well as Figures 3-3c) for adjustably moving the saw guide (workpiece) along the saw guide rail or slide assembly (such as in the vertical direction along rails 19 of the saw guide rail or slide assembly) (see Figures 3-3c as well as at least paragraphs 0007, 0016, 0017, 0020-0021, for example).
However, Hessbrueggen does not expressly teach that the motor 6’ is a “servo” motor.
However, attention is directed to Chhabra. For example, Chhabra teaches that a servo motor is an electric motor “designed to achieve precise angular movement using a servomechanism” in a closed-loop system that “constantly monitors position feedback, allowing the motor to accurately control both speed and rotation for reliable and precise performance” (see Chhabra, page 1, first paragraph). Chhabra further teaches that servo motors are commonly used in industries and automated systems where exact motion control is required, and that its ability to rotate to an exact angle and hold that position makes it ideal for CNC machines and automated manufacturing processes. See page 1, second paragraph. See also page 2. Additionally, pages 2-3 mention (Under the heading “Common applications of servo motors in daily life and industry”) that key uses of servo motors include CNC machines, and “[P]rovide accurate position and speed control in cutting, milling, and drilling operations” which “helps in speeding up production lines with minimal errors”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the generic motor 6’ taught by Hessbrueggen be, specifically, a servo motor, as is known, as taught by Chhabra, for the purpose of enhancing the accuracy and precision of the positioning of the workpiece achieved by the motor 6’, thus enhancing the quality of the resultant machined workpieces, as taught by Chhabra (pages 1-3 and 5, for example).
Claim 5, as best understood in view of the above rejection(s) based on 35 USC 112, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0029567 A1 to Hessbrueggen (hereinafter, “Hessbrueggen”) as applied to at least claims 1-2 above.
Hessbrueggen teaches all aspects of the presently-claimed invention as were described in the above rejection(s) based thereon.
However, regarding claim 5, Hessbrueggen does not expressly teach that the (aforedescribed) saw guide rail or slide assembly comprises a proximity switch for detecting when the saw guide is in the upper position, as set forth in claim 5.
However, Examiner takes Official Notice that the use of proximity switches in machine tools to determine when various driven/moved parts have reached an end (i.e., end of the movement stroke) position is well-known and widely used, in order to enhance the automation and accuracy of the movement (i.e., accuracy of the element being moved to a desired/precision location).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provided the machine tool (guide dresser) taught by Hessbrueggen with proximity switches for determining when each of the translationally movable elements (including 9, as well as both 15s re 10, 10’) has reached the end of the linear movement, for achieving the well-known purpose of enhancing the automation and accuracy of the movement (i.e., accuracy of the element being moved to a desired/precision location). Resultantly, note that the (modified) saw guide rail or slide assembly thus includes such a (known) proximity switch for determining when 9, and thus the workpiece held thereby, is in its upper(most) position along rails 19. See Figures 3-3c.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 12, as best understood in view of the above rejections based on 35 USC 112(b), would be allowable if rewritten (without broadening) to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICA E CADUGAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4474. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 5:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, and via 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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/ERICA E CADUGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722
eec
May 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights