DETAILED ACTION
The Office Action is responsive to the communication filed on 5/7/2026.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13-15, and 17-20 are pending.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13-15, and 17-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. In particular, Applicant’s arguments are directed to Goncharov not teaching or disclosing the disturbance parameters, as recited in independent claims 1 and 11. Dependent claims 3-5, 7-10, 13-15, and 17-20 depend, directly or indirectly, from independent claims 1 and 11. In the current rejection, Mizodami is utilized to teach the disturbance parameters, as recited in independent claims 1 and 11.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0392603 (Goncharov) in view of
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0380634 (Mizokami).
Claim 1:
The cited prior art describes a computer-implemented method for controlling a part-processing device of a computer numerical control machine to bend cannulas, the method comprising the steps of: (Goncharov: “The system 100 of FIG. 4 comprises a computer system 110 operatively coupled to a bending apparatus 120. Broadly, responsive to instructions from the computer system 110, the bending apparatus 120 is configured to form a bend in the archwire 10 having an initial bend angle as determined in the gripped state. The bending apparatus is also arranged to grip or release the archwire 10 in order to allow transition between the gripped and free states. In these embodiments, monitoring of the bend of the archwire 10 and determination of the initial bend angle in the gripped state and a resultant bend angle in the free state can be performed by any means and this information provided to the computer system 110.” Paragraph 0097)
a) receiving one or more set parameters relating to one or more desired bend characteristics; (Goncharov: see the obtaining desired bend angle 402 as illustrated in figure 11 and as described in paragraphs 0128, 0129; “The method begins at step 402 with the computer system 110 obtaining an indication of the desired bend angle in the orthodontic appliance (e.g. the archwire 10). In the embodiment of FIG. 2, the desired bend angle of bend A is the bend angle θ.sub.A in the position 50. The desired bend angle is when the archwire is in the free state.” Paragraph 0129)
b) determining one or more uncontrolled inputs, the one or more uncontrolled inputs comprising bend parameters of a previously bent cannula and one or more disturbance parameters relating to the cannula and/or to one or more part-processing components of the part-processing device, (Goncharov: see the training set of tested wires 510 as illustrated in figure 12 and as described in paragraphs 0158, 0179; “In certain embodiments, the training set includes an indication of a property of the archwire 10 and a target value representative of a desired bend.” Paragraph 0177; “The property of the archwire 10 may include at least one of: an elasticity property of a material from which the archwire 10 is formed, a thickness of the archwire 10, a diameter of the archwire 10, a composition of the archwire 10, and a manufacturing method of the archwire 10. The target value may comprise the initial bend angle.” Paragraph 0179; “In the example of FIG. 3, the initial bend angle is an over-bend angle θ.sub.AOB to take into account an elastic property of the archwire 10 which causes it to spring back to the desired bend angle in the free state.” Paragraph 0135)
Goncharov does not explicitly describe the disturbance parameters as described below. However, Mizokami teaches the disturbance parameters as described below.
wherein the disturbance parameters includes one or more of
temperature, (Mizokami: see the use of temperature in generating the learning model as described in paragraphs 0066, 0067, 0068; “In step S3, the learning section 14 generates the learning model LM by adding the relationship between the image data D.sub.i and the ambient temperature T to the correlation between the image data D.sub.i and the state data D.sub.s. There may be a correlation between the degree of bending of the cable 22 and the ambient temperature T while the robot 20 performs the predetermined operation.” Paragraph 0067)
humidity,
external vibrations,
anisotropic variations,
material defects/variations,
cannula surface finish,
inner diameter variations along the length of the cannula,
outer diameter variations along the length of the cannula,
inner to outer diameter concentricity,
variations in wall thickness along the length of the cannula,
tooling inaccuracies/tolerances,
debris on cannula and/or
tooling, and tooling alignment; (Mizokami: see the use of type and/or orientation of robot in generating the learning model as described in paragraphs 0061, 0062, 0063, 0064, 0065; “In this manner, there may be correlation between degree of bending of the cable 22 and the type of cable 22 or robot 20. Therefore, generating the learning model LM by taking the relationship between the image data D.sub.i and the type of cable 22 or robot 20 into consideration makes it possible to obtain the learning model LM adapted to the type of cable 22 or robot 20.” Paragraph 0061)
c) inputting the one or more set parameters and the one or more uncontrolled inputs into a machine learning model to produce a plurality of outputs, and inspection parameters from the previously bent cannula, the inspection parameters comprising a subset of bend characteristics for validation; (Goncharov: see the determining an initial bend angle by the MLA 404 as illustrated in figure 11 and as described in paragraphs 0134, 0135; “At step 404, the computer system 110 causes execution of the MLA to determine the initial bend angle to be applied to the orthodontic appliance, e.g. the archwire 10, in the gripped state, so that the desired bend angle in the free state can be achieved. In the example of FIG. 3, the initial bend angle is an over-bend angle θ.sub.AOB to take into account an elastic property of the archwire 10 which causes it to spring back to the desired bend angle in the free state.” Paragraph 0135; “In certain embodiments, the training set includes an indication of a property of the archwire 10 and a target value representative of a desired bend.” Paragraph 0177; “The property of the archwire 10 may include at least one of: an elasticity property of a material from which the archwire 10 is formed, a thickness of the archwire 10, a diameter of the archwire 10, a composition of the archwire 10, and a manufacturing method of the archwire 10. The target value may comprise the initial bend angle.” Paragraph 0179; see the training set of tested wires as illustrated in figure 12 and as described in paragraphs 0158, 0179) (Mizokami: see the use of temperature in generating the learning model as described in paragraphs 0066, 0067, 0068; “In step S3, the learning section 14 generates the learning model LM by adding the relationship between the image data D.sub.i and the ambient temperature T to the correlation between the image data D.sub.i and the state data D.sub.s. There may be a correlation between the degree of bending of the cable 22 and the ambient temperature T while the robot 20 performs the predetermined operation.” Paragraph 0067; see the use of type and/or orientation of robot in generating the learning model as described in paragraphs 0061, 0062, 0063, 0064, 0065; “In this manner, there may be correlation between degree of bending of the cable 22 and the type of cable 22 or robot 20. Therefore, generating the learning model LM by taking the relationship between the image data D.sub.i and the type of cable 22 or robot 20 into consideration makes it possible to obtain the learning model LM adapted to the type of cable 22 or robot 20.” Paragraph 0061)
d) determining control parameters using the plurality of outputs, the control parameters relating to one or more settings of the part-processing device; (Goncharov: “The robot control unit 230 is operatively connected to the computer system 110, such as to the processor 150, and can receive instructions from the computer system 110 regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 to form the bend in the archwire 10. Information regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 (e.g. co-ordinates) may be communicated between the robot control unit 230 and the computer system 110. This information may include any one or more of (i) a desired bend angle in the archwire 10 in the free state, (ii) the initial bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state, (iii) an actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending, and (iv) the resultant bend angle of the archwire 10 in the free state. The actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending may also be expressed as a change in angle or a change in deflection. The robot control unit 230 may be operatively connected to the computer system 110 as a wired or wireless connection. The computer system 110 may be at least partially incorporated in the robot control unit 230.” Paragraph 00110)
e) setting the part-processing device using the control parameters and the uncontrolled inputs; and (Goncharov: “The robot control unit 230 is operatively connected to the computer system 110, such as to the processor 150, and can receive instructions from the computer system 110 regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 to form the bend in the archwire 10. Information regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 (e.g. co-ordinates) may be communicated between the robot control unit 230 and the computer system 110. This information may include any one or more of (i) a desired bend angle in the archwire 10 in the free state, (ii) the initial bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state, (iii) an actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending, and (iv) the resultant bend angle of the archwire 10 in the free state. The actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending may also be expressed as a change in angle or a change in deflection. The robot control unit 230 may be operatively connected to the computer system 110 as a wired or wireless connection. The computer system 110 may be at least partially incorporated in the robot control unit 230.” Paragraph 0110)
f) bending a cannula using the part-processing device. (Goncharov: “In certain embodiments, the bend is formed by the computer system 100 sending instructions to the bending apparatus 120 of FIG. 7, for example. The bending apparatus 120, on receiving instructions from the computer system 110, grips the archwire 10 using the first and second gripping members 200, 210, and causes the archwire 10 to bend by applying a relative movement of the first and second gripping members 200, 210.” Paragraph 0137)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Goncharov, namely, forming a bend angle in a wire using machine learning, with the known techniques of Mizokami, namely, using machine learning to bend a cable using a robot, would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. Accordingly, applying the teachings of Goncharov to bend a wire using machine learning with the teachings of Mizokami to use various data inputs for machine learning for bending a cable would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art as resulting in an improved bending system. In other words, the combination of the references provides for a bending system that utilizes machine learning and utilizes various inputs to train the machine learning based on the teachings of a bending system that utilizes machine learning in Goncharov and the teachings of using various inputs to train the machine learning for a bending system in Mizokami.
Claim 3:
The cited prior art describes the computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising the step of: g) determining one or more bend parameters of the cannula bent at step f). (Goncharov: “STEP 508: Obtaining a Measure of a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, When the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0171; “The optical feedback analysis further comprises the computer system 110 selectively executing: in response to the resultant angle being within a predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, determining that the orthodontic appliance has reached the desired bend angle; and in response to the resultant angle being outside the predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, iteratively applying an adjusted bend angle to the orthodontic appliance in the gripped state until the desired bend angle is achieved as determined by the computer vision analysis in the free state.” Paragraph 0173; “STEP 412: Measuring a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, when the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0147; “In certain embodiments, the resultant angle of the bend is performed by capturing at least one image of the formed bend; filtering the image to determine a contour of the orthodontic appliance; determining two elongate (longitudinal) axes of the orthodontic appliance from the contour; and determining an angle between the two longitudinal axes of the orthodontic appliance.” Paragraph 0148)
Claim 4:
The cited prior art describes the computer-implemented method of claim 3, further comprising the step of: h) repeating steps b) to g) for each of a plurality of cannulas that are sequentially bent, and wherein for each of the sequentially bent cannulas, the previously bent cannula is a cannula that was bent immediately preceding the cannula that is bent in step f). (Goncharov: “In certain embodiments, the method further comprises iteratively repeating the method for training until the prediction error is within a pre-determined threshold.” Paragraph 0049; “STEP 508: Obtaining a Measure of a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, When the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0171; “The optical feedback analysis further comprises the computer system 110 selectively executing: in response to the resultant angle being within a predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, determining that the orthodontic appliance has reached the desired bend angle; and in response to the resultant angle being outside the predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, iteratively applying an adjusted bend angle to the orthodontic appliance in the gripped state until the desired bend angle is achieved as determined by the computer vision analysis in the free state.” Paragraph 0173; “STEP 412: Measuring a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, when the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0147; “In certain embodiments, the resultant angle of the bend is performed by capturing at least one image of the formed bend; filtering the image to determine a contour of the orthodontic appliance; determining two elongate (longitudinal) axes of the orthodontic appliance from the contour; and determining an angle between the two longitudinal axes of the orthodontic appliance.” Paragraph 0148)
Claim 5:
The cited prior art describes the computer-implemented method of claim 4, wherein the method further comprises the step of: i) inspecting each of the plurality of cannula that are bent at step f) by comparing their determined one or more bend parameters to the one or more set parameters. (Goncharov: “STEP 410: In Response to the Computer Vision Analysis Rendering an Indication That the Initial Bend Angle in the Orthodontic Appliance in the Gripped State has Been Reached, Causing the Bending Apparatus to Release at Least a Portion of the Orthodontic Appliance so that the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0145; “STEP 508: Obtaining a Measure of a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, When the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0171; “The optical feedback analysis further comprises the computer system 110 selectively executing: in response to the resultant angle being within a predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, determining that the orthodontic appliance has reached the desired bend angle; and in response to the resultant angle being outside the predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, iteratively applying an adjusted bend angle to the orthodontic appliance in the gripped state until the desired bend angle is achieved as determined by the computer vision analysis in the free state.” Paragraph 0173; “STEP 412: Measuring a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, when the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0147; “In certain embodiments, the resultant angle of the bend is performed by capturing at least one image of the formed bend; filtering the image to determine a contour of the orthodontic appliance; determining two elongate (longitudinal) axes of the orthodontic appliance from the contour; and determining an angle between the two longitudinal axes of the orthodontic appliance.” Paragraph 0148)
Claim 7:
The cited prior art describes the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the bend parameters include one or more of bend radius, bend angle, bend position, bend orientation and flow rate. (Goncharov: see the obtaining desired bend angle 402 as illustrated in figure 11 and as described in paragraphs 0128, 0129; “The method begins at step 402 with the computer system 110 obtaining an indication of the desired bend angle in the orthodontic appliance (e.g. the archwire 10). In the embodiment of FIG. 2, the desired bend angle of bend A is the bend angle θ.sub.A in the position 50. The desired bend angle is when the archwire is in the free state.” Paragraph 0129)
Claim 8:
The cited prior art describes the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the set parameters include one or more of bend radius, bend angle, bend position, bend orientation and flow rate. (Goncharov: see the determining an initial bend angle by the MLA 404 as illustrated in figure 11 and as described in paragraphs 0134, 0135; “At step 404, the computer system 110 causes execution of the MLA to determine the initial bend angle to be applied to the orthodontic appliance, e.g. the archwire 10, in the gripped state, so that the desired bend angle in the free state can be achieved. In the example of FIG. 3, the initial bend angle is an over-bend angle θ.sub.AOB to take into account an elastic property of the archwire 10 which causes it to spring back to the desired bend angle in the free state.” Paragraph 0135)
Claim 9:
The cited prior art describes the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the step of setting the part-processing device using the control parameters and the uncontrolled inputs includes setting one or more tooling components of the part-processing device. (Goncharov: “The robot control unit 230 is operatively connected to the computer system 110, such as to the processor 150, and can receive instructions from the computer system 110 regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 to form the bend in the archwire 10. Information regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 (e.g. co-ordinates) may be communicated between the robot control unit 230 and the computer system 110. This information may include any one or more of (i) a desired bend angle in the archwire 10 in the free state, (ii) the initial bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state, (iii) an actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending, and (iv) the resultant bend angle of the archwire 10 in the free state. The actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending may also be expressed as a change in angle or a change in deflection. The robot control unit 230 may be operatively connected to the computer system 110 as a wired or wireless connection. The computer system 110 may be at least partially incorporated in the robot control unit 230.” Paragraph 00110)
Claim 10:
The cited prior art describes the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the control parameters include one or more of a die configuration, a shoe configuration, a clamp configuration, a clamp position, a tooling bend angle, a number of bending stages, a cannula position and a bending speed. (Goncharov: “The robot control unit 230 is operatively connected to the computer system 110, such as to the processor 150, and can receive instructions from the computer system 110 regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 to form the bend in the archwire 10. Information regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 (e.g. co-ordinates) may be communicated between the robot control unit 230 and the computer system 110. This information may include any one or more of (i) a desired bend angle in the archwire 10 in the free state, (ii) the initial bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state, (iii) an actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending, and (iv) the resultant bend angle of the archwire 10 in the free state. The actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending may also be expressed as a change in angle or a change in deflection. The robot control unit 230 may be operatively connected to the computer system 110 as a wired or wireless connection. The computer system 110 may be at least partially incorporated in the robot control unit 230.” Paragraph 00110)
Claim 11:
The cited prior art describes a part-processing control system for controlling a part-processing device of a computer numerical control machine to bend cannulas, the part-processing control system comprising: (Goncharov: “The system 100 of FIG. 4 comprises a computer system 110 operatively coupled to a bending apparatus 120. Broadly, responsive to instructions from the computer system 110, the bending apparatus 120 is configured to form a bend in the archwire 10 having an initial bend angle as determined in the gripped state. The bending apparatus is also arranged to grip or release the archwire 10 in order to allow transition between the gripped and free states. In these embodiments, monitoring of the bend of the archwire 10 and determination of the initial bend angle in the gripped state and a resultant bend angle in the free state can be performed by any means and this information provided to the computer system 110.” Paragraph 0097)
a processor and (Goncharov: “From one aspect, there is provided a method for forming a desired bend angle in an orthodontic appliance, the method being implemented by a processor of a computer system, the computer system operatively coupled to a bending apparatus, the method comprising” paragraph 0014; “Turning first to the computer system 110, certain embodiments of the computer system 110 have a computer environment 140 as illustrated schematically in FIG. 6 and comprises various hardware components including one or more single or multi-core processors collectively represented by a processor 150, a solid-state drive 160, a random access memory 170 and an input/output interface 180.” Paragraph 0099)
a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the processor cause the part-processing control system to: (Goncharov: “From one aspect, there is provided a method for forming a desired bend angle in an orthodontic appliance, the method being implemented by a processor of a computer system, the computer system operatively coupled to a bending apparatus, the method comprising” paragraph 0014; “Turning first to the computer system 110, certain embodiments of the computer system 110 have a computer environment 140 as illustrated schematically in FIG. 6 and comprises various hardware components including one or more single or multi-core processors collectively represented by a processor 150, a solid-state drive 160, a random access memory 170 and an input/output interface 180.” Paragraph 0099)
a) receive one or more set parameters relating to one or more desired bend characteristics; (Goncharov: see the obtaining desired bend angle 402 as illustrated in figure 11 and as described in paragraphs 0128, 0129; “The method begins at step 402 with the computer system 110 obtaining an indication of the desired bend angle in the orthodontic appliance (e.g. the archwire 10). In the embodiment of FIG. 2, the desired bend angle of bend A is the bend angle θ.sub.A in the position 50. The desired bend angle is when the archwire is in the free state.” Paragraph 0129)
b) determine one or more uncontrolled inputs, the one or more uncontrolled inputs comprising bend parameters of a previously bent cannula and one or more disturbance parameters relating to the cannula and/or to one or more part-processing components of the part-processing device, (Goncharov: see the training set of tested wires as illustrated in figure 12 and as described in paragraphs 0158, 0179; “In certain embodiments, the training set includes an indication of a property of the archwire 10 and a target value representative of a desired bend.” Paragraph 0177; “The property of the archwire 10 may include at least one of: an elasticity property of a material from which the archwire 10 is formed, a thickness of the archwire 10, a diameter of the archwire 10, a composition of the archwire 10, and a manufacturing method of the archwire 10. The target value may comprise the initial bend angle.” Paragraph 0179; “In the example of FIG. 3, the initial bend angle is an over-bend angle θ.sub.AOB to take into account an elastic property of the archwire 10 which causes it to spring back to the desired bend angle in the free state.” Paragraph 0135)
Goncharov does not explicitly describe the disturbance parameters as described below. However, Mizokami teaches the disturbance parameters as described below.
wherein the disturbance parameters includes one or more of
temperature, (Mizokami: see the use of temperature in generating the learning model as described in paragraphs 0066, 0067, 0068; “In step S3, the learning section 14 generates the learning model LM by adding the relationship between the image data D.sub.i and the ambient temperature T to the correlation between the image data D.sub.i and the state data D.sub.s. There may be a correlation between the degree of bending of the cable 22 and the ambient temperature T while the robot 20 performs the predetermined operation.” Paragraph 0067)
humidity,
external vibrations,
anisotropic variations,
material defects/variations,
cannula surface finish,
inner diameter variations along the length of the cannula,
outer diameter variations along the length of the cannula,
inner to outer diameter concentricity,
variations in wall thickness along the length of the cannula,
tooling inaccuracies/tolerances,
debris on cannula and/or
tooling, and tooling alignment; (Mizokami: see the use of type and/or orientation of robot in generating the learning model as described in paragraphs 0061, 0062, 0063, 0064, 0065; “In this manner, there may be correlation between degree of bending of the cable 22 and the type of cable 22 or robot 20. Therefore, generating the learning model LM by taking the relationship between the image data D.sub.i and the type of cable 22 or robot 20 into consideration makes it possible to obtain the learning model LM adapted to the type of cable 22 or robot 20.” Paragraph 0061)
c) input the one or more set parameters and the one or more uncontrolled inputs into a machine learning model to produce a plurality of outputs and inspection parameters from the previously bent cannula, the inspection parameters comprising a subset of bend characteristics for validation; (Goncharov: see the determining an initial bend angle by the MLA 404 as illustrated in figure 11 and as described in paragraphs 0134, 0135; “At step 404, the computer system 110 causes execution of the MLA to determine the initial bend angle to be applied to the orthodontic appliance, e.g. the archwire 10, in the gripped state, so that the desired bend angle in the free state can be achieved. In the example of FIG. 3, the initial bend angle is an over-bend angle θ.sub.AOB to take into account an elastic property of the archwire 10 which causes it to spring back to the desired bend angle in the free state.” Paragraph 0135; “In certain embodiments, the training set includes an indication of a property of the archwire 10 and a target value representative of a desired bend.” Paragraph 0177; “The property of the archwire 10 may include at least one of: an elasticity property of a material from which the archwire 10 is formed, a thickness of the archwire 10, a diameter of the archwire 10, a composition of the archwire 10, and a manufacturing method of the archwire 10. The target value may comprise the initial bend angle.” Paragraph 0179; see the training set of tested wires as illustrated in figure 12 and as described in paragraphs 0158, 0179) (Mizokami: see the use of temperature in generating the learning model as described in paragraphs 0066, 0067, 0068; “In step S3, the learning section 14 generates the learning model LM by adding the relationship between the image data D.sub.i and the ambient temperature T to the correlation between the image data D.sub.i and the state data D.sub.s. There may be a correlation between the degree of bending of the cable 22 and the ambient temperature T while the robot 20 performs the predetermined operation.” Paragraph 0067; see the use of type and/or orientation of robot in generating the learning model as described in paragraphs 0061, 0062, 0063, 0064, 0065; “In this manner, there may be correlation between degree of bending of the cable 22 and the type of cable 22 or robot 20. Therefore, generating the learning model LM by taking the relationship between the image data D.sub.i and the type of cable 22 or robot 20 into consideration makes it possible to obtain the learning model LM adapted to the type of cable 22 or robot 20.” Paragraph 0061)
d) determine control parameters using the plurality of outputs, the control parameters relating to one or more settings of the part-processing device; (Goncharov: “The robot control unit 230 is operatively connected to the computer system 110, such as to the processor 150, and can receive instructions from the computer system 110 regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 to form the bend in the archwire 10. Information regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 (e.g. co-ordinates) may be communicated between the robot control unit 230 and the computer system 110. This information may include any one or more of (i) a desired bend angle in the archwire 10 in the free state, (ii) the initial bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state, (iii) an actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending, and (iv) the resultant bend angle of the archwire 10 in the free state. The actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending may also be expressed as a change in angle or a change in deflection. The robot control unit 230 may be operatively connected to the computer system 110 as a wired or wireless connection. The computer system 110 may be at least partially incorporated in the robot control unit 230.” Paragraph 00110)
e) set the part-processing device using the control parameters and the uncontrolled inputs; and (Goncharov: “The robot control unit 230 is operatively connected to the computer system 110, such as to the processor 150, and can receive instructions from the computer system 110 regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 to form the bend in the archwire 10. Information regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 (e.g. co-ordinates) may be communicated between the robot control unit 230 and the computer system 110. This information may include any one or more of (i) a desired bend angle in the archwire 10 in the free state, (ii) the initial bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state, (iii) an actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending, and (iv) the resultant bend angle of the archwire 10 in the free state. The actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending may also be expressed as a change in angle or a change in deflection. The robot control unit 230 may be operatively connected to the computer system 110 as a wired or wireless connection. The computer system 110 may be at least partially incorporated in the robot control unit 230.” Paragraph 0110)
f) bend a cannula using the part-processing device. (Goncharov: “In certain embodiments, the bend is formed by the computer system 100 sending instructions to the bending apparatus 120 of FIG. 7, for example. The bending apparatus 120, on receiving instructions from the computer system 110, grips the archwire 10 using the first and second gripping members 200, 210, and causes the archwire 10 to bend by applying a relative movement of the first and second gripping members 200, 210.” Paragraph 0137)
Goncharov and Mizokami are combinable for the same rationale as set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Claim 13:
The cited prior art describes the system of claim 11, wherein the part-processing control system is further caused to: g) determine one or more bend parameters of the cannula bent at step f). (Goncharov: “STEP 508: Obtaining a Measure of a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, When the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0171; “The optical feedback analysis further comprises the computer system 110 selectively executing: in response to the resultant angle being within a predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, determining that the orthodontic appliance has reached the desired bend angle; and in response to the resultant angle being outside the predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, iteratively applying an adjusted bend angle to the orthodontic appliance in the gripped state until the desired bend angle is achieved as determined by the computer vision analysis in the free state.” Paragraph 0173; “STEP 412: Measuring a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, when the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0147; “In certain embodiments, the resultant angle of the bend is performed by capturing at least one image of the formed bend; filtering the image to determine a contour of the orthodontic appliance; determining two elongate (longitudinal) axes of the orthodontic appliance from the contour; and determining an angle between the two longitudinal axes of the orthodontic appliance.” Paragraph 0148)
Claim 14:
The cited prior art describes the system of claim 13, wherein the part-processing control system is further caused to: h) repeat steps b) to g) for each of a plurality of cannulas that are sequentially bent, and wherein for each of the sequentially bent cannulas, the previously bent cannula is a cannula that was bent immediately preceding the cannula that is bent in step f). (Goncharov: “In certain embodiments, the method further comprises iteratively repeating the method for training until the prediction error is within a pre-determined threshold.” Paragraph 0049; “STEP 508: Obtaining a Measure of a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, When the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0171; “The optical feedback analysis further comprises the computer system 110 selectively executing: in response to the resultant angle being within a predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, determining that the orthodontic appliance has reached the desired bend angle; and in response to the resultant angle being outside the predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, iteratively applying an adjusted bend angle to the orthodontic appliance in the gripped state until the desired bend angle is achieved as determined by the computer vision analysis in the free state.” Paragraph 0173; “STEP 412: Measuring a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, when the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0147; “In certain embodiments, the resultant angle of the bend is performed by capturing at least one image of the formed bend; filtering the image to determine a contour of the orthodontic appliance; determining two elongate (longitudinal) axes of the orthodontic appliance from the contour; and determining an angle between the two longitudinal axes of the orthodontic appliance.” Paragraph 0148)
Claim 15:
The cited prior art describes the system of claim 14, wherein the part-processing control system is further caused to: i) inspect each of the plurality of cannula that are bent at step f) by comparing their determined one or more bend parameters to the one or more set parameters. (Goncharov: “STEP 410: In Response to the Computer Vision Analysis Rendering an Indication That the Initial Bend Angle in the Orthodontic Appliance in the Gripped State has Been Reached, Causing the Bending Apparatus to Release at Least a Portion of the Orthodontic Appliance so that the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0145; “STEP 508: Obtaining a Measure of a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, When the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0171; “The optical feedback analysis further comprises the computer system 110 selectively executing: in response to the resultant angle being within a predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, determining that the orthodontic appliance has reached the desired bend angle; and in response to the resultant angle being outside the predefined tolerance level of the desired bend angle, iteratively applying an adjusted bend angle to the orthodontic appliance in the gripped state until the desired bend angle is achieved as determined by the computer vision analysis in the free state.” Paragraph 0173; “STEP 412: Measuring a Resultant Angle of the Bend Through the Computer Vision Analysis, when the Orthodontic Appliance is in the Free State” paragraph 0147; “In certain embodiments, the resultant angle of the bend is performed by capturing at least one image of the formed bend; filtering the image to determine a contour of the orthodontic appliance; determining two elongate (longitudinal) axes of the orthodontic appliance from the contour; and determining an angle between the two longitudinal axes of the orthodontic appliance.” Paragraph 0148)
Claim 17:
The cited prior art describes the system of claim 11, wherein the bend parameters include one or more of bend radius, bend angle, bend position, bend orientation and flow rate. (Goncharov: see the obtaining desired bend angle 402 as illustrated in figure 11 and as described in paragraphs 0128, 0129; “The method begins at step 402 with the computer system 110 obtaining an indication of the desired bend angle in the orthodontic appliance (e.g. the archwire 10). In the embodiment of FIG. 2, the desired bend angle of bend A is the bend angle θ.sub.A in the position 50. The desired bend angle is when the archwire is in the free state.” Paragraph 0129)
Claim 18:
The cited prior art describes the system of claim 11 wherein the set parameters include one or more of bend radius repeatability, bend angle repeatability, bend position, bend orientation and flow rate. (Goncharov: see the determining an initial bend angle by the MLA 404 as illustrated in figure 11 and as described in paragraphs 0134, 0135; “At step 404, the computer system 110 causes execution of the MLA to determine the initial bend angle to be applied to the orthodontic appliance, e.g. the archwire 10, in the gripped state, so that the desired bend angle in the free state can be achieved. In the example of FIG. 3, the initial bend angle is an over-bend angle θ.sub.AOB to take into account an elastic property of the archwire 10 which causes it to spring back to the desired bend angle in the free state.” Paragraph 0135)
Claim 19:
The cited prior art describes the system of claim 11, wherein the step of setting the part-processing device using the control parameters and the uncontrolled inputs includes setting one or more tooling components of the part-processing device. (Goncharov: “The robot control unit 230 is operatively connected to the computer system 110, such as to the processor 150, and can receive instructions from the computer system 110 regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 to form the bend in the archwire 10. Information regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 (e.g. co-ordinates) may be communicated between the robot control unit 230 and the computer system 110. This information may include any one or more of (i) a desired bend angle in the archwire 10 in the free state, (ii) the initial bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state, (iii) an actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending, and (iv) the resultant bend angle of the archwire 10 in the free state. The actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending may also be expressed as a change in angle or a change in deflection. The robot control unit 230 may be operatively connected to the computer system 110 as a wired or wireless connection. The computer system 110 may be at least partially incorporated in the robot control unit 230.” Paragraph 00110)
Claim 20:
The cited prior art describes the system of claim 11, wherein the control parameters include one or more of a die configuration, a shoe configuration, a clamp configuration, a clamp position, a tooling bend angle, a number of bending stages, a cannula position, a bending torque, and a bending speed. (Goncharov: “The robot control unit 230 is operatively connected to the computer system 110, such as to the processor 150, and can receive instructions from the computer system 110 regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 to form the bend in the archwire 10. Information regarding the movement and operation of the first gripping member 200, the second gripping member 210, and/or the robotic arm 220 (e.g. co-ordinates) may be communicated between the robot control unit 230 and the computer system 110. This information may include any one or more of (i) a desired bend angle in the archwire 10 in the free state, (ii) the initial bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state, (iii) an actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending, and (iv) the resultant bend angle of the archwire 10 in the free state. The actual bend angle in the archwire 10 in the gripped state during bending may also be expressed as a change in angle or a change in deflection. The robot control unit 230 may be operatively connected to the computer system 110 as a wired or wireless connection. The computer system 110 may be at least partially incorporated in the robot control unit 230.” Paragraph 00110)
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0166909 describes real time adaptive control of manufacturing processes using machine learning.
U.S. Patent No. 8,886,348 describes fabricating and tracking pipe design.
Ma, J., Li, H., Chen, G.Y., Welo, T., Li, G.J. (2021). Machine Learning (ML)-Based Prediction and Compensation of Springback for Tube Bending. In: Daehn, G., Cao, J., Kinsey, B., Tekkaya, E., Vivek, A., Yoshida, Y. (eds) Forming the Future. The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series. Springer, Cham. describes using machine learning based predictions for tube bending.
Cruz, D.J.; Barbosa, M.R.; Santos, A.D.; Miranda, S.S.; Amaral, R.L. Application of Machine Learning to Bending Processes and Material Identification. Metals 2021, 11, 1418 describes using machine learning for sheet metal bending.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E EVERETT whose telephone number is (571)272-2851. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am to 5:00 pm (Pacific).
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, Robert Fennema can be reached on 571-272-2748. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Christopher E. Everett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights