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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The limitation of claim 1 reading “a fourth distance sensor able to configured a second horizontal distance to said lower knife” should read “a fourth distance sensor able to measure a second horizontal distance to said lower knife”. Appropriate correction is 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 of this title, 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 10, 13-14, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPGPUB 20080229599, Auth in view of JP2002096214, Torio, (see google translation attached, referred to as TorioTr), and in view of US 20030073382, Manor.
(As a preliminary matter, in the rejections below, it is noted that the designation of the distance sensors as “first”, “second”, “third”, and “fourth” “distance sensors”, while substantive, may be met with various prior art apparatuses regardless of which sensor therein is designated as a first through fourth sensor. In other words, while the number of sensors is substantive, the designation of each sensor is simply semantic. For instance, as long as a device includes four sensors, two of which help to sense a gap distance, and two of which sense an overlap distance, then the claim is met, regardless of whether the sensors are designated as a “first”, “second”, “third” or ”fourth” sensor. For instance, as treated below, the first distance sensor in Auth is designated as a first vertical distance sensor, the second distance sensor is designated as a first distance sensor is designated as a first vertical distance sensor vertical distance sensor; the third distance sensor is designated as a first horizontal distance sensor, and the fourth distance sensor is designated as a second horizontal distance sensor. Such numerical designations do not change the fact that the Auth apparatus has the correct number of sensors as required per the claims as set forth).
Regarding Claims 10 and 14, Auth discloses:
A trimming device for metallic sheets (par.0028 “metal strip to be trimmed”) comprising:
an upper knife (3) including an upper knife central circular face (face on outer diameter of knife), the upper knife having an upper knife diameter (diameter of knife) and an upper knife thickness (thickness of knife, see fig. 2), the upper knife being mounted on an upper shaft (upper shaft 15 [left in fig 2]);
a lower knife (2) including a lower knife central circular face (face on outer diameter of knife), the lower knife having a lower knife diameter (diameter of knife) and a lower knife thickness (thickness of knife), the lower knife mounted on a lower shaft (lower shaft 15) [right in fig 2]);
the upper knife and the lower knife being vertically shifted (par 0029) so as to define an overlap V therebetween (par 0029), the overlap defining a shear of the metallic sheet to be trimmed (par 0029 and par. 0020);
at least one of the upper and lower shafts being movable vertically (par 0029 and 0032, since the blades are “fixed” on the shafts [par 0032] and the mounting of the blades is adjustable vertically to change the “vertical overlap V” between the blades, via the actuators 9, which are all also attached fixedly to the shafts [par 0029]);
wherein the upper knife and said lower knife are horizontally shifted to define a gap distance between the central circular faces of the upper knife and the lower knife (par 0029), at least one of the upper and lower shafts is movable horizontally (par 0030)
the computer (controller 17) is configured to compute the gap distance (par. 0037), and
the trimming device further comprising:
a first horizontal distance sensor (upper probe 10 and switch 21) configured to measure a first horizontal distance to the upper knife (par’s. 0034 and par 0037), and a second horizontal distance sensor (Lower probe 10 and switch 22) configured to measure a second horizontal distance to said lower knife (par’s. 0034 and 0037).
Auth lacks: a first vertical distance sensor able to measure a first vertical distance to an upper end of the upper knife; a second vertical distance sensor able to measure a second vertical distance to a lower end of the lower knife; and a computer able to compute the overlap (Claim 10), and a method of trimming metallic sheets by the trimming device as recited in claim 10 (abstract of Auth), comprising the steps of: measuring a first vertical distance between the first vertical distance sensor and the upper knife central circular face; measuring a second vertical distance between the second vertical distance sensor and the lower knife central circular face; and computing an overlap LMEASURED based on the first and second vertical distances, the diameters of the upper and lower knives and a position of the first distance sensor relative to the position of the second distance sensor (Claim 14).
Torio discloses a device and method of use for trimming metallic sheets (second par. of pg. 2 of TorioTr [attached version/translation] “cutting a metal band”) via shearing knives, in the same field of endeavor as the device and method of use for trimming metallic sheets via shearing knives of the present invention and discloses that such a system comprises: an upper knife 1a, a lower knife 1b, the upper knife and the lower knife being vertically shifted with an overlap so as to define a shear of the metallic sheet (last par. of page 3 of TorioTr and first full par. of pg. 4 of Torio Tr); at least one of the upper and lower knives being movable vertically (last par. of page 3 of TorioTr and first full par. of pg. 4 of Torio Tr); (which is analogous to the shifting/adjust device of Auth) and discloses that said adjustment system and method of use includes:
a first vertical distance sensor (combination of light emitter 2 and sensing device 3a) able to measure a first vertical distance to an upper end of the upper knife (last par. of pg 4 of TorioTr, which discloses that the light sensors 3a works with emitter 2 to measure a change in the amount of “shadow” produced by the upper blade blocking a portion of the light, and thus measuring a difference between the top edge of the blade and the sensor apparatus); a second vertical distance sensor 3b able to measure a second vertical distance to a lower end of the lower knife (last par. of pg 4 of TorioTr, which discloses that the light sensors 3b works with emitter 2 to measure a change in the amount of “shadow” produced by the lower blade blocking a portion of the light, and thus measuring a difference between the bottom edge of the blade and the sensor apparatus) able to compute the vertical overlap between said knives (last 2 par’s. of pg. 4 of TorioTr), (Claim 10) and the method of use of the Torio device also comprises the steps of measuring a first vertical distance between the first distance sensor and a portion of the upper knife (last par. of pg 4 of TorioTr which discloses that the light sensors 3b works with emitter 2 to measure a change in the amount of “shadow” produced by the lower blade blocking a portion of the light, and thus measuring a difference between the bottom edge of the blade and the sensor apparatus); measuring a second vertical distance between the second distance sensor and a portion the lower knife (last par. of pg 4 of TorioTr, which discloses that the light sensors 3b works with emitter 2 to measure a change in the amount of “shadow” produced by the lower blade blocking a portion of the light, and thus measuring a difference between the bottom edge of the blade and the sensor apparatus); and computing an overlap LMEASURED based on the first and second vertical distances (last par. of pg 4 of TorioTr), the diameters of the upper and lower knives and a position of the first distance sensor relative to the position of the second distance sensor (last par. of pg 4 of TorioTr) (Claim 14) in order to determine when the blades are worn and to adjust the vertical overlap between the blades accordingly (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Auth by including a first vertical distance sensor able to measure a first vertical distance to an upper end of the upper knife; a second vertical distance sensor able to measure a second vertical distance to a lower end of the lower knife; and a computer able to compute the overlap (Claim 10), and the method of trimming metallic sheets by the trimming device as recited in claim 10 (abstract of Auth), comprising the steps of: measuring a first vertical distance between the first vertical distance sensor and the upper knife; measuring a second vertical distance between the second vertical distance sensor and the lower knife; and computing an overlap LMEASURED based on the first and second vertical distances, the diameters of the upper and lower knives and a position of the first distance sensor relative to the position of the second distance sensor (Claim 14), in order to determine when the blades are worn and to adjust the vertical overlap between the blades accordingly, as taught by Torio.
As modified above, Auth may be considered to lack an actual distance measurement from the top and bottom faces of the respective top and bottom blades to the sensor (per claim 10) and the distance measurement including measurement from the sensors to the central circular faces of the blades (as required by claim 14).
Manor discloses a device for measuring a wear on a blade surface, in the same field of endeavor as the wear detecting device of the present invention and discloses that in measuring the wear on a blade that it is beneficial to obtain such measurement by directly measuring the distance between a sensor 300 and a central circular face at an outer edge of a blade (fig 3A and par’s. 0031-0032), in order to measure the wear on a blade in a less time consuming manner as in conventional wear measures (see par 0010-0011).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Auth by making the wear sensing device thereof measure the direct distance between the sensor device and the outer faces of the blades at the central circular faces thereof in order to perform such wear measurements in a less time consuming manner as in conventional wear measures as taught per Manor.
Regarding Claim 13, in Auth, the first shaft and the second shaft are both able to be moved vertically (par 0029 and 0032, since the blades are mounted on the shafts and the mounting of the blades is adjustable vertically).
Regarding Claim 16, in Auth, the method of use thereof further comprises the steps of: measuring a first horizontal distance between the first horizontal distance sensor and the upper knife (par 0034); measuring a second horizontal distance between the second horizontal distance sensor and the lower knife (par 0034); computing a gap distance based on the first horizontal distance and the second horizontal distances, and a position of the first horizontal distance sensor relative to the position of the second horizontal distance sensor (par’s. 0034-0037).
Auth lacks the gap distance measurement also being based on the thickness of the blades.
In Torio the gap measurement calculation includes a thickness measurement of the blades (e.g. “horizontal wear” measurement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Auth by making the gap adjusting calculation of Auth include a thickness measurement of the blades in order to have the gap adjustment account for any wear which affects the thicknesses of the blades during use, as taught in Torio.
Regarding Claim 18, Auth as modified in view of Torio and Manor discloses a method of measuring an overlap between two slitting blades using the method as recited in Claim 14 (see Claim 14 rejection below). Modified Auth, as modified in the Claim 14 rejection above, also includes a method for assessing a wear of a trimming device for metallic sheets comprising the use of: an upper knife including an upper knife central circular face, the upper knife having an upper knife diameter and an upper knife thickness, the upper knife being mounted on an upper shaft; a lower knife including a lower knife central circular face, the lower knife having a lower knife diameter and a lower knife thickness, the lower knife mounted on a lower shaft; the upper knife and the lower knife being vertically shifted so as to define an overlap therebetween, the overlap defining a shear of the metallic sheet to be trimmed; at least one of the upper and lower shafts being movable vertically; a first distance sensor able to measure a first vertical distance to an upper end of the upper knife; a second distance sensor able to measure a second vertical distance to a lower end of the lower knife; and a computer able to compute the overlap (see Claim 14 rejection above).
Modified Auth lacks, the method also including the method comprising: while the upper and lower trimming knives are still, measuring an overlap, LSTILL, using the method as recited in claim 14;- measuring an overlap, LROTATING, with the upper and lower trimming knives being rotating, using the method as recited in claim 14;- comparing the two measurements, LSTILL and LROTATING; and- emitting an alert if a difference between LSTILL and LROTATING is greater than a predefined threshold value LDANGER (which are all required by Claim 16).
Torio discloses a method for assessing the wear (third par. of pg. 3 of TorioTr “accurately predict the wear”) of a trimming device for metallic sheet (second par. of pg. 2 of TorioTr “cutting a metal band”) having: an upper knife 1A including an upper knife central circular face having an upper knife diameter (fig 1) and an upper knife thickness (as seen in fig. 5a and b); a lower knife 1b including a lower knife central circular face (fig 1) having a lower knife diameter (fig 1) and a lower knife thickness (See thickness as seen in fig 5a 5b), the upper knife and the lower knife being vertically shifted with an overlap so as to define a shear of the metallic sheet (last par. of page 3 of TorioTr and first full par. of pg. 4 of Torio Tr); at least one of the upper and lower shafts being movable vertically (second par. of pg. 5 TorioTr); a first distance sensor (3a) able to measure a first vertical distance to an upper end of the upper knife (last par of pg 4 of TorioTr); a second distance sensor 3b able to measure a second vertical distance to a lower end of the lower knife (last par. of pg 4 of TorioTr); and a computer (processing device 10) able to compute the overlap (last 2 par’s. of pg. 4 of TorioTr); the method comprising: while the upper and lower trimming knives are still (“before the start” (of a trimming operation, third par. of pg 5 TorioTr), measuring an overlap, LSTILL, (“predetermined clearance overlap”; third par. of pg 5 TorioTr) using the method as recited in claim 14 (see above); measuring an overlap, LROTATING, with the upper and lower trimming knives being rotating, (overlap measured after the start of the crop, third par. of pg 5 TorioTr) using the method of Claim 14 (see explanation below); comparing the two measurements, LSTILL and LROTATING (third par. of pg 5 TorioTr) and- emitting an alert (replacement command signal, fourth par. of pg 5 TorioTr), if a difference between LSTILL and LROTATING (“correction overlap”, third par. of pg 5 TorioTr) is greater than a predefined threshold value LDANGER (“allowable range”, fourth par. of pg 5 TorioTr), in order to adjust for wear of the blades within a predetermined range, (fourth par. of pg 5 TorioTr).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Auth by having a method of use thereof include while the upper and lower trimming knives are still, measuring an overlap, LSTILL, using the method as recited in claim 14;- measuring an overlap, LROTATING, with the upper and lower trimming knives being rotating, using the method as recited in claim 14;- comparing the two measurements, LSTILL and LROTATING; and- emitting an alert if a difference between LSTILL and LROTATING is greater than a predefined threshold value LDANGER, in order to adjust for wear of the blades within a predetermined range as taught by Torio.
Claims 12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Auth in view of Torio and Manor, as applied to Claims 10 and 16, respectively, above, and further in view of GB2514774A, Wootton.
Regarding Claim 12, Modified Auth discloses all of the limitations of claim 10 as discussed.
Modified Auth lacks the first, second, third and fourth distance sensors are inductive sensors (claim 12).
Wootton discloses a Shear and a blade gap detection for a shear, in the same field of endeavor as the shear with blade gap detection of the present invention and includes: the horizontal gap distance sensors being inductive sensors (pg 6, 5-9), in order to allow the device to measure the distance in a contactless manner thus making blade change and maintenance more convenient, page 6, 5-10.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Auth by having each of the sensors thereof be inductive sensors (claim 12) in order to allow the device to measure the distance in a contactless manner thus making blade change and maintenance more convenient, as taught in Wootton.
Regarding Claim 17, Modified Auth, lacks the method of use including wherein a gap working range, from a minimum gap GMINIMUM to a maximum gap GMAXIMUM, is defined and wherein the method comprises the steps of:- comparing the gap distance to GMINIMUM and GMAXIMUM,- if the gap distance is smaller than GMINIMUM, moving horizontally at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set the gap distance at least equal to GMINIMUM,- if the gap distance is greater than GMAXIMUM, moving horizontally at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set the gap distance at maximum to GMAXIMUM.
Wootton discloses a rotating blade adjustable shearing device in the same field of endeavor as the rotating blade adjustable shearing device of the present invention and discloses that the tool includes: a gap working range (“acceptable range” in the steps 39. page 8, lines 20-30), from GMINIMUM to GMAXIMUM, (since a range implicitly comprises maximum and minimum values) is defined and wherein the method comprises the steps of: comparing the gap distance to GMINIMUM and GMAXIMUM, if the gap distance is smaller than GMINIMUM, moving horizontally at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set the gap distance at least equal to GMINIMUM, (page 8, lines 20-30),- if the gap distance is greater than GMAXIMUM, moving horizontally at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set the gap distance at maximum to GMAXIMUM (page 8, lines 20-30), in order to adjust the gap of the blades in accordance with an acceptable range of distances between the blades, based on a material to be sheared, (page 8, 15-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Auth by having the method of use including wherein a gap working range, from a minimum gap GMINIMUM to a maximum gap GMAXIMUM, is defined and wherein the method comprises the steps of:- comparing the gap distance to GMINIMUM and GMAXIMUM,- if the gap distance is smaller than GMINIMUM, moving horizontally at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set the gap distance at least equal to GMINIMUM,- if the gap distance is greater than GMAXIMUM, moving horizontally at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set the gap distance at maximum to GMAXIMUM, in order to adjust the gap of the blades in accordance with an acceptable range of distances between the blades, based on a material to be sheared, as taught by Wootton.
Claim 15, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Auth in view of Torio and Manor as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of CN111468775A to China National Heavy Machinery Research Institute Co Ltd (translation attached, and herein referred to as “China National”).
Regarding Claim 15, Modified Auth lacks the process of use including an overlap working range, from a minimum overlap LMINIMUM to a maximum overlap LMAXIMUM, is defined, the method further comprising the steps of: comparing LMEASURED to LMINIMUM and LMAXIMUM, -if LMEASURED is smaller than LMINIMUM, moving vertically at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set LMEASURED at least equal to LMINIMUM, - if LMEASURED is greater than LMAXIMUM, moving vertically at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set LMEASURED at maximum to LMAXIMUM (claim 15).
As noted above, the Auth device as modified by Torio discloses an adjusting of the shafts vertically in order to adjust an overlap of the blades.
However, Modified Auth lacks the process steps for this vertical adjustment also including comparing the values measured (LMEASURED) to a desired range e.g., LMINIMUM and LMAXIMUM, as required by claim 15.
China National, discloses a web slitter in the same field of endeavor as the slitter of the present invention (see abstract) and includes: defining a working range (“allowable error range” of “overlap target value”, fourth par of pg 6 of China National), minimum overlap LMINIMUM to a maximum overlap LMAXIMUM, of an overlap distance (since defining an allowable error range of the overlap target value of an overlapping amount with an “allowable error” amount, per steps three and six, in China National, intrinsically includes an upper and lower limit) the method further comprising the steps of: comparing LMEASURED to LMINIMUM and LMAXIMUM, (ninth to eleventh par. of pg. 9 of China National) if LMEASURED is smaller than LMINIMUM, moving vertically at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set LMEASURED at least equal to LMINIMUM, if LMEASURED is greater than LMAXIMUM, moving vertically at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set LMEASURED at maximum to LMAXIMUM, (twelfth par. of pg. 9 of China National “when the difference value between the detection value of the overlapping amount of the disc shear and the target value of the overlapping amount of the disc shear is smaller than or equal to an allowable error value, the control module controls the motor of the adjusting module to stop rotating; and when the difference value between the detection value of the overlapping amount of the disc shear and the target value of the overlapping amount of the disc shear is larger than the allowable error value, returning to the step, and controlling the motor of the adjusting module to continuously rotate and adjust by the control module”) in order to insure accurate overlapping positioning of the knives via an automatic control, (fourth to last par. of pg. 6 of China National).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Auth by including defining a working range (for the overlap adjustment of China National), from minimum overlap LMINIMUM to a maximum overlap LMAXIMUM, the method further comprising the steps of: comparing LMEASURED to LMINIMUM and LMAXIMUM, - if LMEASURED is smaller than LMINIMUM, moving vertically at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set LMEASURED at least equal to LMINIMUM, - if LMEASURED is greater than LMAXIMUM, moving vertically at least one of the upper and lower shafts to set LMEASURED at maximum to LMAXIMUM (claim 15), in order to ensure accurate positioning of the knives as disclosed in China National, Also an artisan of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would be beneficial to an end user to have the adjustment be based on a predetermined error range in order to automatically control of an accurate adjustment of the overlapping amount of the blades, as disclosed by China national.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 8/13/25, with respect to indefiniteness rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant has amended the claims to overcome the previous antecedent basis issue. Thus, the 35 USC 112 rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 8/13/25, with respect to drawing objection have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant has amended the drawings to include arrows showing the upper and lower knives to be movable. Thus, the drawing objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see remark(s), filed 8/13/2025, with respect to prior art rejections, as the claims are presently amended, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant correctly notes that Tahara lacks wherein the upper knife and said lower knife are horizontally shifted to define a gap distance between the central circular faces of the upper knife and the lower knife (emphasis added). A new rejection is made over Auth in view of Torio.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPN 5681204 discloses a distance detecting sensor arranged to detect the distance between the sensor and the blade member at a specified interval and output a variation of the detected distance as a displacement of the blade member. While, USPN 4991475 discloses measuring devices by means of which changes in the distance between sensor and saw blade can be determined by induced currents, and converted into measuring signals, and thus each disclose elements of the present invention. Also, each of USPGPUB and USPN 3181758 4459888 5423239 2048684 3312135 20080295664 20030131699 7495759 7971510 5176055 20160107249 7086173 20040159693 and 20160107249 disclose state of the are blade slitters with detection and adjustor devices, and thus each disclose elements of the present invention.
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 comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FERNANDO A AYALA whose telephone number is (571)270-5336. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-5pm Eastern standard.
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, Adam Eiseman can be reached on 571-270-3818. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FERNANDO AYALA/
Examiner, Art Unit 3724
/BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724