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) was submitted on 05/10/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1,
in lines 1-2, the term “a components” should read as “a component[[s]]”,
in line 2, the term “a component” should read as “the component”,
in line 11, the term “a component” should read as “the component”,
in line 18, the term “a component” should read as “the component”.
Regarding claim 16, the term “a component” should read as “the component”.
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 2-6, 9-10, 14-16, 18, 20-22 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.
Regarding claim 2, the term “a sufficiently low partial pressure of oxygen” in claim is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “sufficiently low” 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.
Regarding claims 3-6, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the adjustment arm" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 10, the phrase "such as", and the phrase “preferably” render the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Additionally, the term “near” in claim is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “near” 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.
Regarding claim 14, the term “sufficiently” in claim is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “sufficiently” 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.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the laterally extending adjustment arm" in lines 5-6 and the limitation “the adjustment arm”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 16, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Additionally, the claim recites the limitation "the central control unit" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 18, the term “sufficient to” in claim is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “sufficient to” 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. Additionally, the claim recites the limitation "the central control unit" and limitation “the adjustment arm” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 20, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 21, the claim recites the limitation "the central control unit" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 22, the claim recites the limitation "the central control unit" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-6, 10, 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riemann (US 20200156361 A1) in view of Li (CN 110465806 A and see the PDF attached).
Regarding independent claim 1, Riemann discloses, additive manufacturing apparatus (see additive manufacturing system 100 in Fig. 1) for the production or repair of a component (see a part layer 122 in Fig. 1), wherein the apparatus includes a support platform (see build surface motion system 124 in Fig. 1) on which the component (122) is built or repaired (see Fig. 1), with the support platform mounted for motorized movement relative to a horizontally extending X-Y plane (see Fig. 1 and disclosed in para 0051 “build surface motion system 124 may move and rotate the build surface in and about the X, Y, and Z axes during the manufacturing of part layers 122” and para 0089 “the process code may be automatically generated by CAM Software 128 or Slicing Software 130”, wherein motorized movement in manufacturing is a critical aspect of automation); a direct metal deposition system (see directed energy source 106 with directed energy guides 118 in Fig. 1) having a metal deposition head (see deposition element 120 in Fig. 1) carried above the platform (see Fig. 1) by a multi-axis robotic arm (see process motion system 112 in Fig. 1, wherein the process motion system 112 is read as multi-axis robotic arm because process motion system 112 may move and rotate deposition element 120, distance sensor 114, and tooling 116 in and about the X, Y, and Z axes during the manufacturing of part layers 122 as disclosed in para 0050) that is mounted adjacent to the support platform (see Fig. 1), wherein the robotic arm (112) is operable to move the deposition head relative to the platform in a three-axis co-ordinate system having X- and Y-axes parallel to the horizontally extending X-Y plane and a Z-axis perpendicular to the horizontally extending X-Y plane (see Fig. 1 and disclosed in para 0050 “process motion system 112 may move and rotate deposition element 120, distance sensor 114, and tooling 116 in and about the X, Y, and Z axes during the manufacturing of part layers 122”); and wherein the apparatus further includes a central processing unit (CPU) (see Fig. 1) providing integration of computer numerical control (CNC) (disclosed in para 0040 “the process code may cause process motion system 112 or build surface motion system 124 to move” and para 0085 “The process code could be, for example, G-code, computer numeric control (CNC) code, numeric control (NC) code, G&M code, Motion Program code, or the like”) operation of the direct metal deposition system (106) in depositing successive superimposed layers (see subsequent layers in Fig. 1) of metal to build or repair a component (122), with the central processing unit operable to integrate movement of the support platform (124) relative to the horizontally extending X-Y plane and actuation of the robotic arm (112) to adjust the deposition head (120) parallel to the Z-axis and away from the support platform after each layer is deposited (disclosed in para 0050-0051 “process motion system 112 may move and rotate deposition element 120, distance sensor 114, and tooling 116 in and about the X, Y, and Z axes during the manufacturing of part layers 122 […] build surface motion system 124 may move and rotate the build surface in and about the X, Y, and Z axes during the manufacturing of part layers 122”), as required for repetitive deposition of metal in successive layers each superimposed on a preceding layer (see Fig. 2), with the integration of operation in each case based on closed loop control with feedback monitoring (see Fig. 9) whereby each successive deposited layer of metal replicates the form and dimensions of a respective successive slice of the component (see Fig 2), or part of a component being repaired, in accordance with a 3D computer aided design (CAD) description of the component (see in Fig. 1, and disclosed in para 0052 and 0085 “Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software 126 may be used to design a digital representation of a part to be manufactured, such as a 3D model […] The process code could be, for example, G-code, computer numeric control (CNC) code, numeric control (NC) code, G&M code, Motion Program code, or the like. The process code may be generated by CAM and/or Slicing Software, such as CAM Software 128 and Slicing Software 130 described with respect to FIG. 1. The process code may be based on a part design, such as a 3D design model created in a software, such as CAD software 126 described with respect to FIG. 1”); and wherein the apparatus further includes a tooling unit (see tooling 116 in Fig. 1) adapted to enable physical properties of deposited metal to be varied by in-situ flattening of each, or selected, layers (see surface defect 704 in Fig. 7) prior to deposition of the next layer (see Fig. 7) and the central processing unit (CPU) is operable to enable the tooling unit (116) to be positioned a distance from the support platform so that, as the support platform is moved relative to the X-Y plane to advance newly deposited metal in a layer in the course of being formed (see Fig. 1 and disclosed in para 0050 “process motion system 112 may move and rotate deposition element 120, distance sensor 114, and tooling 116 in and about the X, Y, and Z axes during the manufacturing of part layers 122”).
However, Riemann does not explicitly disclose, the forging and/or micro-rolling (herein forging/micro-rolling) unit adapted to enable physical properties of deposited metal to be varied by in-situ forging of each, or selected, layers prior to deposition of the next layer, the tooling unit including:
(a) an adjustment member adjustably mounted above the support platform for motorized movement of the adjustment member parallel to or in the direction of the Z-axis; and
(b) a forging/micro-rolling head depending below the adjustment member and including:
(i) a depending member rotatable on an axis parallel to the Z-axis, and
(ii) a forging/micro-rolling roller mounted at a lower end of a depending member with the roller rotatable on an axis extending substantially parallel to the horizontally extending X-Y plane;
with the arrangement such that, by varying the spacing of the adjustment member from the support platform, the forging/micro-rolling head is adjustable towards or away from the support platform, parallel to or in the direction of the Z-axis whereby, with use of the forging/micro-rolling unit, the central processing unit (CPU) is operable to enable the forging/micro-rolling head to be positioned a distance from the support platform so that, as the support platform is moved relative to the X-Y plane to advance newly deposited metal in a layer in the course of being formed, the forging/micro-rolling head is operable to apply controlled rolling pressure progressively along a line of deposited metal and the depending member is rotated parallel to the Z-axis as required to maintain the axis of the roller substantially perpendicular to a linear line of deposited metal or substantially at right angles to a tangent to a curved line of deposited metal.
Nonetheless, Li teaches, the forging and/or micro-rolling (herein forging/micro-rolling) unit (see Fig. 1) adapted to enable physical properties of deposited material to be varied by in-situ forging of the component (disclosed in the specification “the heat pressing roller 7 to rotate to realize heating roller pressing the molten material”), the forging/micro-rolling unit including:
(a) an adjustment member (see sliding sleeve 6 in Fig. 1) adjustably mounted above the component for motorized movement of the adjustment member parallel to or in the direction of the Z-axis (see sliding sleeve 6 is sliding up and down in Z-axis in Fig. 1 and Fig. 5); and
(b) a forging/micro-rolling head (see hot press roller 7 in Fig. 1) depending below the adjustment member (see Fig. 1, wherein hot press roller 7 is position below sliding sleeve 6) and including:
(i) a depending member (see rotating piece 8 in Fig. 1) rotatable on an axis parallel to the Z-axis (disclosed in the specification “the rotating member 8 is a bevel gear, and the tooth surface of the rotating piece 8 is set upwards, the rotating piece 8 rotate axial direction is vertically arranged”), and
(ii) a forging/micro-rolling roller (see hot press roller 7 in Fig. 1) mounted at a lower end of a depending member (see Fig. 1) with the roller (7) rotatable on an axis extending substantially parallel to the horizontally extending X-Y plane (see annotated Fig. 1);
with the arrangement such that, by varying the spacing of the adjustment member from the component (see Fig. 1 and Fig. 5, wherein sliding sleeve 6 is sliding up and down in Z-axis), the forging/micro-rolling head (7) is adjustable towards or away from the component (see Fig. 1 and Fig. 5), parallel to or in the direction of the Z-axis whereby (see Fig. 1 and Fig. 5), with use of the forging/micro-rolling unit (see Fig. 1), the forging/micro-rolling head (7) to be positioned a distance from the component so that (see Fig. 5), the forging/micro-rolling head (7) is operable to apply controlled rolling pressure progressively along a line of deposited material (disclosed in the specification “the heat pressing roller 7 to rotate to realize heating roller pressing the molten material”) and the depending member (8) is rotated parallel to the Z-axis as required to maintain the axis of the roller substantially perpendicular to a linear line of deposited material (see Fig. 1 and Fig. 5) or substantially at right angles to a tangent to a curved line of deposited metal.
PNG
media_image1.png
369
595
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Since in para 0050, Riemann discloses, the tool unit (116) and the support platform (124) is configured to move and rotate about the X, Y, and Z axes during the manufacturing of part layers 122, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filling date (post AIA ) to modify the tooling unit 116 of Riemann wherein the tooling unit is the forging and/or micro-rolling (herein forging/micro-rolling) unit adapted to enable physical properties of deposited metal to be varied by in-situ forging of each, or selected, layers prior to deposition of the next layer, the tooling unit including: (a) an adjustment member adjustably mounted above the support platform for motorized movement of the adjustment member parallel to or in the direction of the Z-axis; and (b) a forging/micro-rolling head depending below the adjustment member and including: (i) a depending member rotatable on an axis parallel to the Z-axis, and (ii) a forging/micro-rolling roller mounted at a lower end of a depending member with the roller rotatable on an axis extending substantially parallel to the horizontally extending X-Y plane as taught/suggested by Li such that with the arrangement such that, by varying the spacing of the adjustment member from the support platform, the forging/micro-rolling head is adjustable towards or away from the support platform, parallel to or in the direction of the Z-axis whereby, with use of the forging/micro-rolling unit, the central processing unit (CPU) is operable to enable the forging/micro-rolling head to be positioned a distance from the support platform so that, as the support platform is moved relative to the X-Y plane to advance newly deposited metal in a layer in the course of being formed, the forging/micro-rolling head is operable to apply controlled rolling pressure progressively along a line of deposited metal and the depending member is rotated parallel to the Z-axis as required to maintain the axis of the roller substantially perpendicular to a linear line of deposited metal or substantially at right angles to a tangent to a curved line of deposited metal. Doing so would obtain a forging/micro-rolling unit to help reducing the residual stress so the layers after forging/micro-rolling are more compact that could facilitate the improvement of the property of the additive layers (see the specification of Li “the purpose of ensuring to roll away from the position of the forming region by a plurality of hot pressing roller repeatedly, reducing the residual stress, so that molten material after hot press of hot pressing roll tissue is more compact, improve the mechanical property of the molten material”).
Regarding claim 3, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1, Riemann further discloses, wherein the direct metal deposition system (106) is a welding-based shaped metal deposition system (see direction energy source guides 118 in Fig. 1), in which wire, or rod is melted to form a molten pool by an arc (disclosed in para 0045 “Deposition element 120 may be connected with material feed 108 and may direct material, such as metal powder or wire, towards a focal point of directed energy source 106. In this way, deposition element 120 may control the amount of material that is additively manufactured at a particular point in time. Deposition element may include nozzles, apertures, and other features for directing material, such as metal powder or wire, towards a manufacturing surface, such as a build surface or previously deposited material layer”), such as a tungsten inert gas (TIG), metal inert gas (MIG), or other systems in which wire, or rod is melted utilizing plasma or inductive heating.
Regarding claim 4, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1, Riemann further discloses, wherein the direct metal deposition system (106) is a deposition system in which blown metal powder is melted by an electromagnetic beam (disclosed in para 0042 “Directed energy source 106 may provide any suitable form of directed energy, such as a laser beam (e.g., from a fiber laser) or an electron beam generator, which is capable of melting a manufacturing material, such as a metal powder or wire”), such as a laser or electron beam, with direct laser deposition (DLD) being preferred (disclosed in para 0004 “Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM)), fusing or binding from a powder bed techniques (e.g., Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), Selective laser melting (SLM), and Electron beam melting (EBM)), lamination techniques, photopolymerization techniques (e.g., stereo lithography), powder- or wire-fed directed energy deposition (e.g., direct metal deposition (DMD), laser additive manufacturing (LAM), laser metal deposition (LMD)”).
Regarding claim 5, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1, Riemann further discloses, further including a basal structure above which the support platform is mounted and relative to which the support platform is movable linearly, such as parallel to one of the X- and Y-axes and motorized to be rotatable on an axis parallel to the Z-axis, such as in the manner of a turntable.
Regarding claim 6, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1, Riemann further discloses, further including a basal structure above which the support platform is mounted and relative to which the support platform is movable by being mounted on a motorized upper carriage that is movable linearly parallel to one of the X- and Y-axes, with the upper carriage mounted on a motorized lower carriage that is movable linearly parallel to the other one of the X and Y-axes, with the support platform optionally being motorized to be rotatable on an axis parallel to the Z-axis, such as in the manner of a turntable (disclosed in para 0051 “build surface motion system 124 may move and rotate the build surface in and about the X, Y, and Z axes during the manufacturing of part layers 122”).
Regarding claim 10, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1, Riemann further discloses, wherein the deposition head (120) is near to the tooling head (116), such as from about 10 to 60 mm, preferably of from about 15 to 40 mm.
However, Riemann does not explicitly disclose, the forging and/or micro-rolling head.
Nonetheless, Li teaches, the forging and/or micro-rolling (herein forging/micro-rolling) head (see roller 7 in Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filling date (post AIA ) to modify the tooling head 116 of Riemann wherein the tooling head is the forging and/or micro-rolling head as taught/suggested by Li in order to hot press the deposit layers to help reducing the residual stress so the layers after forging/micro-rolling are more compact that could facilitate the improvement of the property of the additive layers (see the specification of Li “the purpose of ensuring to roll away from the position of the forming region by a plurality of hot pressing roller repeatedly, reducing the residual stress, so that molten material after hot press of hot pressing roll tissue is more compact, improve the mechanical property of the molten material”).
Regarding claim 21, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1, Riemann further discloses, wherein the central control unit (see control system 104 in Fig. 1) operates the direct metal deposition system (106) by actuating the multi-axis robotic arm (124) to position the metal deposition head (120) as required for metal deposition by actuation of the robotic arm maintain the deposition head at fixed coordinates relative to the X- and Y-axes, while adjusting the position of the deposition head parallel to the Z-axis, in synchronism with movement of the adjustment arm in the direction of the Z-axis, to allow for the progressive build-up of metal as successive layers are deposited (disclosed in para 0050 “process motion system 112 may move and rotate deposition element 120, distance sensor 114, and tooling 116 in and about the X, Y, and Z axes during the manufacturing of part layers 122”).
Regarding claim 22, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1, Riemann further discloses, wherein the control unit (see control system 104 in Fig. 1) actuates a feed mechanism (see material feed 106 in Fig. 1) providing a supply of feed metal to the deposition head (118), whether the feed metal is wire, rod or metal powder, and control unit also powers the deposition head to melt the metal for deposition and progression of a weld pool (see Fig. 1 and disclosed in para 0042 “Directed energy source 106 may provide any suitable form of directed energy, such as a laser beam (e.g., from a fiber laser) or an electron beam generator, which is capable of melting a manufacturing material, such as a metal powder or wire.”).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riemann in view of Li and in further view of Gou (CN 210475531 U and see the PDF attached).
Regarding claim 2, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1.
However, Riemann in view of Li does not explicitly disclose, wherein the apparatus is contained within a housing that is either air-tight or maintained at a slight overpressure whereby the apparatus can operate in a controlled protective or inert atmosphere, or at least an atmosphere with a sufficiently low partial pressure of oxygen minimizing oxidation or fire risk.
Nonetheless, Gou teaches, wherein the apparatus is contained within a housing (see housing of chamber 1) that is either air-tight (disclosed in the specification “chamber 1 is a sealed space”) or maintained at a slight overpressure whereby the apparatus can operate in a controlled protective or inert atmosphere (disclosed in the specification “a closed space filled with inert gas”), or at least an atmosphere with a sufficiently low partial pressure of oxygen minimizing oxidation or fire risk (disclosed in the specification “a vacuum pump capable of pumping to obtain the recycling channel for vacuum environment so as to generate the negative pressure, the recovered powder, at the same time, avoid the air entering the forming chamber is connected with the recycling passage 1, causing in the printing process, workpiece reacts with air”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filling date (post AIA ) to modify the apparatus of Riemann in view of Li wherein the apparatus the apparatus is contained within a housing that is either air-tight or maintained at a slight overpressure whereby the apparatus can operate in a controlled protective or inert atmosphere, or at least an atmosphere with a sufficiently low partial pressure of oxygen minimizing oxidation or fire risk as taught/suggested by Gou. Doing so would can avoid the laser temperature is high to cause the powder or the component and the air reaction (see the specification of Gou “the forming chamber 1 is a sealed space, when three-dimensional printing, a closed space filled with inert gas, it can avoid the laser temperature is high to cause the powder or the component and the air reaction”).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riemann in view of Li and in further view of He (CN 109807563 A and see the PDF attached).
Regarding claim 11, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1.
However, Riemann in view of Li does not explicitly disclose, wherein the temperature of the forging/micro-rolling head is controllable by circulation of a cooling fluid, most conveniently water, through the forging/micro-rolling head.
Nonetheless, He teaches, wherein the temperature of the forging/micro-rolling head (cooling roller pressure device 3 in Fig. 1) is controllable by circulation of a cooling fluid, most conveniently water, through the forging/micro-rolling head (disclosed in the specification “cooling roller pressure device 3 comprises a roller 31, heat conducting column 32 and the heat-conducting outer ring 33, heat-conducting outer ring 33 through ball bearing 37 rotatably assembled on the heat conducting column 32 the outer wall of the heat conducting column 32 provided with a cavity 34. upper surface of the heat conducting column 32 is provided with a cooling water inlet connected with the cavity 34 35, lower surface heat-conducting post 32 is provided with a cooling water outlet communicated with the cavity 34 of 36, roller 31 is fixed at the center of the upper surface of the heat conducting column 32. and the roller 31 and 4 synchronous action of the stirring head of the welding gun of the welding robot 5 or friction stir processing device”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filling date (post AIA ) to modify the forging/micro-rolling head of Riemann in view of Li wherein the forging/micro-rolling head is controllable by circulation of a cooling fluid, most conveniently water, through the forging/micro-rolling head as taught/suggested by He in order to avoid friction during the processing and multi-layer metal over-heat which can cause the component coarsening (disclosed in the specification of He “cooling water cooling rolling device in 3 and it can avoid friction stir processing and multi-layer metal over-heat to cause tissue coarsening”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 8 and 12 would be allowable if rewritten 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 7, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1, however, Riemann in view of Li does not explicitly disclose, wherein the apparatus further includes a column that extends in the direction of the Z-axis to stand above and to one side of the support platform, with the column fixed in relation to a rigid base above which the support platform is positioned; and wherein the adjustment member comprises an adjustment arm that extends laterally from the column, with the adjustment arm adjustably mounted on the column to enable motorized movement of the adjustment arm parallel to or in the direction of the Z-axis. No additional evidence was found to reasonably render a case of obviousness against the claimed invention. As such, claim 7 is allowed.
Regarding claim 8, Riemann in view of Li discloses the apparatus of claim 1, however, Riemann in view of Li does not explicitly disclose, wherein the forging/micro-rolling head comprises a hollow roller that is secured by being journaled in the lower ends of depending arms of a yoke, with a respective connector projecting form the end of each stub axle to enable the roller to be connected in a fluid flow line to enable circulation of cooling fluid through the roller. No additional evidence was found to reasonably render a case of obviousness against the claimed invention. As such, claim 8 is allowed.
Claims 9 and 13-20 are also objected as being dependent upon claim 8.
Regarding claim 12, Riemann in view of Li and in further view of He the apparatus of claim 11, however, Riemann in view of Li and in further view of He does not explicitly disclose, wherein the forging/micro-rolling head comprises a hollow roller that is secured at the lower end of the rod of the forging unit by being journaled in the lower ends of depending arms of a yoke mounted at the lower end of the rod, with a respective connector projecting form the end of each stub axle to enable the roller to be connected in a fluid flow line to enable circulation of cooling fluid through the roller.
No additional evidence was found to reasonably render a case of obviousness against the claimed invention. As such, claim 12 is allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday approx. 6:00 am-3:30 pm ET.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached on (571) 272-9059. 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.
/VY T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761