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 .
Drawings/Specification
The amendment filed April 21, 2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: the lubricant supply device being a nozzle; the illustrated nozzle and its location in Figure 2; the valve for adjusting the pressure cylinders (originally disclosed a plural valves); and the illustrated valve leading to a single cylinder in Figure 2.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
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 clamp recited in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1, 3, and 6-10 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.
Claim 1 recites “a main spindle rotatable around a spindle axis perpendicular to the support surface” in Lines 6-7. This recitation contains new matter. In particular, the spindle axis being oriented perpendicular to the support surface is new matter. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 9 recites “a valve for adjusting a spring force of the at least one pressure cylinder.” This limitation contains new matter. The claim lacks support in the specification at the time of filing for a valve adjusting one or more cylinders. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 10 recites “the clamp further comprises at a nozzle for supplying lubricant to cool the machining tool.” This recitation contains new matter. Specifically, the specification at the time of filing lacks support for a nozzle. Appropriate correction required.
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, 3, and 6-10 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.
Claim 1 recites “such that the clamp follows the movement axes of the main spindle” in Line 9. The limitation “the movement axes” lacks proper antecedent basis. Furthermore, the scope of the clamp following movement axes is unclear. If Applicant means to recite that the clamp is directly attached to the main spindle such that it moves with the spindle, then the limitation should be written to reflect that intention. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 1 recites “such that the clamp follows the movement axes of the main spindle” in Line 9. Examiner suggests reciting capability (e.g., is capable of being adjusted) if that is the desired scope intended. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 9 recites “a valve for adjusting a spring force of the at least one pressure cylinder.” It is unclear whether the valve is respective to each cylinder or if the valve adjusts pressure of all cylinders. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 10 limitation “comprises at a nozzle” in Line 2. It is unclear if there is a missing term in this limitation or if it contains a typographical error. As it stands, the phrase is grammatically incorrect, which leads to a lack of clarity in claim scope. Appropriate correction required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3 and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sullivan (US Patent No. 3,617,141) in view of Cooper Roller Bearing Co. (GB 543,807).
(Claim 1) Sullivan discloses method of machining a workpiece (Figs. 1-7). The machine tool includes a workpiece support (12) having a support surface. The machine tool also includes a main spindle (29 corresponding to pressure foot 90) rotatable around a spindle axis perpendicular to the support surface (Figs. 1, 3, 6). The method includes fastening a machining tool (28) and clamp (24) to the main spindle (Fig. 6). As best understood, the clamp follows the movement axes of the main spindle (as best understood, the arrangement in Fig. 7 shows the connection between the clamp and the spindle). The clamp includes a receiving plate (24) for fastening the clamp to the main spindle; and a pressure plate (90) for pressing the workpiece on the workpiece support (Fig. 6). The pressure plate is annular (98; Col. 5, Lines 50-51) and includes a passage opening (Figs. 5-7). The method includes connecting the receiving plate and the pressure plate by at least one pressure cylinder (93, 93a); pressing the workpiece against the workpiece support using the pressure plate (90; Fig. 6); and adjusting a contact pressure of the pressure plate (90) on the workpiece with the at least one cylinder (Col. 6, Lines 1-3). The method further includes guiding the machining tool through the passage opening during the machining of the workpiece (Fig. 6). Sullivan does not explicitly disclose the workpiece being a roller bearing cage.
Cooper Roller Bearing Company (“Cooper”) discloses a method of machining a rolling bearing cage (a) using a bearing presser (f) through which a machining tool (e) extends for machining the roller bearing cage (Fig. 3). At a time prior to filing it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the method disclosed in Sullivan with a roller bearing cage workpiece as suggested by Cooper in order to drill pockets (b) in the rolling bearing cage.
(Claim 3) The machining tool (Sullivan 28) is guided centrally through the passage opening (Sullivan Figs. 5-7).
(Claim 6) The modified method further includes forming a first pocket of the pockets in the rolling bearing cage using the machining tool (Sullivan 28; Cooper Page 3, Line 34), and detaching the pressure plate from the rolling bearing cage (obvious known use to remove after machining to release workpiece).
(Claim 7) The first pocket is drilled (Sullivan via machining tool 28; Cooper Page 3, Line 34).
(Claim 8) The modified Sullivan method does not explicitly disclose the rolling bearing cage material. Yet, at a time prior to filing it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide method disclosed in Sullivan with a rolling bearing cage formed from copper or a copper-based alloy in order to take advantage of the materials relatively high strength, ductility, wear resistance, corrosion resistance, thermal conductivity, and low friction. See MPEP § 2144.07 (“The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”). See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious).
(Claim 9) The method includes a valve for adjusting the spring force of the at least one pressure cylinder (Sullivan 93, 93a; Col. 5, Lines 69-72).
(Claim 10) The clamp further includes at least one nozzle (Sullivan 115) for supplying lubricant to cool the machining tool (Sullivan via 106, 108). In the alternative, because Applicant failed to traverse the well-known assertion of at least one lubricant supply device on the clamping means, it is taken as admitted prior art. See MPEP § 2144.03 C. As such, at a time prior to filing it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide at least one lubricant supply device (i.e., nozzle) as claimed in order to provide lubricant to the cutting area (reducing heat/friction at the cutting point).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 21, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the Sullivan reference fails to disclose fastening a machining tool and a clamp to the main spindle such that the clamp follows the movement axes of the main spindle. Examiner disagrees. Both the tool and the clamp are fixed to the main spindle such that if the spindle moves laterally or axially, the tool and clamp move laterally or axially.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN RUFO whose telephone number is (571)272-4604. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs.
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, Singh Sunil 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.
/RYAN RUFO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722
Prosecution Insights