DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments, see "Remarks", pages 6-7, filed December 30, 2025, with respect to issues with the drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive. The aforemention of September 30, 2025 has been withdrawn.
3. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2 and 4-11 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.
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.
4. Claims 1-2, 4-6, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai (US20170308063A1, hereinafter "Kawai"; cited in prior PTO-892) in view of Morimura (US20170326701A1, hereinafter "Morimura"; cited in prior PTO-892).
In regard to claim 1, Kawa teaches a tool measurement assembly [tool measurement apparatus 60] for a mill-turn machine {machine tool 1, paras. [0003]-[0005] describe a variety of known tools for manufacture that include rotating/turning, at least paras. [0054], [0069], and [0072] describe milling, and mill-turn machines are well known in the art}, comprising: a laser tool setter [laser light 60a] having a laser transmitter that measures an outer surface of a rotary cutting tool held by the mill-turn machine {described at least in paras. [0035] and [0048]}; a physical stylus tool probe configured to contact a stationary cutting tool held by the mill-turn machine {para. [0089] describes the use of a probe for a non-rotating tool, para. [0035] describes an embodiment where the tool measurement apparatus 60 has a probe}, and wherein the tool measurement assembly is configured to mount to the mill-turn machine [shown affixed in Fig. 1] allowing the tool measurement assembly to move into a measurement position within a workspace {para. [0035] describes that the tool measurement apparatus 60 can move to come into contact with a tool to perform a measurement}.
Although Kawai is not explicit as to the use of a yoke with two elongated sides that carry the laser light and measurement probe, para. [0035] describes that the tool measurement apparatus can be any optional measurement apparatus, and para. [0098] describes that the combination of described elements is expected.
However, Morimura also teaches a tool measurement assembly [in-machine robot 20] for a mill-turn machine {machine tool – described as a mill machine or other types of machines known in the art in para. [0053]} as well as a yoke with two elongate sides [arm 42a-c] that could carry a laser tool setter and a physical stylus tool {paras. [0039] and [0043] describes a plurality of end effectors 46}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to used Morimura’s yoke to hold Kawai’s laser tool setter and physical stylus probe in order to better measure a plurality of conditions, as described by Morimura {paras. [0039] and [0043]}.
In regard to claim 2, Kawai further teaches a laser receiver {para. [0048] describes that the tool measurement apparatus 60 detects laser light}.
In regard to claim 4, Kawai further teaches a rail that couples the tool measurement assembly to the mill-turn machine {para. [0031] describes that the Z-axis guide rail 18 attaches the table 14 to the bed 12 of the machine tool 1, Fig. 1 shows the tool measurement apparatus 60 on the table 14}.
In regard to claims 5 and 9, although Kawai teaches bring a probe into contact with a tool {para. [0089]}, Kawai is not explicit as to the use of a pivot to couple the physical stylus tool probe to the tool measurement assembly such that the physical stylus tool probe moves about the pivot away from the tool measurement assembly and toward a tool head.
However, Morimura teaches that the tool measurement assembly comprises a pivot [joints 44a-44c] that couples the physical stylus tool probe to the tool measurement assembly [shown in Fig. 1] such that the physical stylus tool probe moves about the pivot away from the tool measurement assembly and toward a tool head [rotary tool/tool spindle 38 – articulation of the joints shown in Figs. 2-9].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Morimura’s pivots as the moving means to bring Kawai’s probe into contact with a tool in order to better align a probe with a tool, as described by Morimura {paras. [0036]-[0045]}.
In regard to claim 6 and 10, although Kawai teaches bringing the tool measurement assembly into a desired measurement position {para. [0091]} and calculating the measurement position {para. [0087]}, Kawai is not explicit as to the use of a proximity sensor or encoder for determining the position of the tool measurement assembly relative to the mill-turn machine.
However, Morimura teaches the use of a proximity sensor {para. [0039] describes that the sensors may be of a contact or distance sensor} for determining the position [distance] of the tool measurement assembly to the mill-turn machine [target].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Morimura’s use of a distance sensor with Kawai’s measurement position calculation in order to better detect the distance between a tool and the tool measurement assembly, as taught by Morimura {paras. [0039]-[0042]}.
In regard to claim 8, Kawai teaches a tool measurement assembly [tool measurement apparatus 60] for a mill-turn machine {machine tool 1, paras. [0003]-[0005] describe a variety of known tools for manufacture that include rotating/turning, at least paras. [0054], [0069], and [0072] describe milling, and mill-turn machines are well known in the art}, comprising: a rail configured to couple with the mill-turn machine {para. [0031] describes that the Z-axis guide rail 18 attaches the table 14 to the bed 12 of the machine tool 1, Fig. 1 shows the tool measurement apparatus 60 on the table 14} and permit the tool measurement assembly to move into a workspace {para. [0035] describes that the tool measurement apparatus 60 can move to come into contact with a tool to perform a measurement}; a laser tool setter [laser light 60a] having a laser transmitter that measures an outer surface of a rotary cutting tool held by the mill-turn machine {described at least in paras. [0035] and [0048]}; a physical stylus tool probe configured to contact a stationary cutting tool held by the mill-turn machine {para. [0089] describes the use of a probe for a non-rotating tool, para. [0035] describes an embodiment where the tool measurement apparatus 60 has a probe}, that retractably deploys [obvious to retract the measurement probe from the workpiece before resuming motion else the probe would be damaged].
Although Kawai is not explicit as to the use of a yoke with two elongated sides that carry the laser light and measurement probe, para. [0035] describes that the tool measurement apparatus can be any optional measurement apparatus, and para. [0098] describes that the combination of described elements is expected.
However, Morimura also teaches a tool measurement assembly [in-machine robot 20] for a mill-turn machine {machine tool – described as a mill machine or other types of machines known in the art in para. [0053]} as well as a yoke with two elongate sides [arm 42a-c] that could carry a laser tool setter and a physical stylus tool {paras. [0039] and [0043] describes a plurality of end effectors 46}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to used Morimura’s yoke to hold Kawai’s laser tool setter and physical stylus probe in order to better measure a plurality of conditions, as described by Morimura {paras. [0039] and [0043]}.
5. Claims 7 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai in view of Morimura as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6, and 8-10 above, and further in view of Klugger (US20180111240A1; Klugger et al., hereinafter "Klugger").
In regard to claims 7 and 11, although Kawai teaches the use of an actuator {servo motors, described at least in paras. [0040]-[0042]}, Kawai in view of Morimura is silent as to the use of a pneumatic actuator coupling coupled to the tool measurement assembly and the mill-turn machine {para. [0030] describes the use of a pneumatic actuator to operate the measuring system}.
However, Klugger teaches a tool measurement assembly [tool measurement system measuring device 10] that uses a pneumatic actuator {para. [0030] describes the use of a pneumatic actuator to operate the measuring system} with a pneumatic actuator coupling {pneumatic bayonet coupling 702, described in para. [0100]} coupled to the assembly [shown in Figs. 5-7] and coupled to a mill-turn machine {para. [0001] describes a mill-turn machine}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Klugger’s pneumatic actuator and subsequent pneumatic couplings as Kawai in view of Morimura’s actuator because using a pneumatic actuator instead of an electronic actuator is an obvious substitution, as taught by Klugger {paras. [0030]-[0031] describe that an electronic controller and pneumatic controller can be used interchangeably with their own advantages}.
In regard to claim 12, Kawai is not explicit as to the location of the measurement probe on the tool measurement apparatus.
However, Morimura teaches that the end effectors of the measurement assembly can be on opposite ends of the arms {shown in Figs. 5-7, described in paras. [0036]-[0045]} – thus it is perfectly reasonable that the contact sensor be on one end, with portions of a non-contact sensor {distance sensor or other sensor described in para. [0039]} on an opposite end and a same end as the contact sensor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Morimura’s method of placing sensors on an end of a yoke as the positioning for Kawai’s probe and laser sensors in order to better align the sensors with a target, as taught by Morimura {taught at least in paras. [0044]-[0045]}.
Although Kawai teaches the use of a laser tool setter with a laser transmitter and receiver, Kawai in view of Morimura is not explicit as to the configuration of the transmitter and receiver.
However, Klugger teaches that the tool measurement assembly also has a laser transmitter [light transmitter portion 14] and a laser receiver [light receiver portion 16] configured on opposite sides of an elongated yoke [connecting block 30 – shown in Fig. 1] in opposed alignment such that a space defined between the opposed elongated sides accommodates a laser beam [light beam 24 - described as a laser beam] during laser-based measurement of the outer surface of the rotary cutting tool {shown in Fig. 1, described in para [0077]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Klugger’s configuration of a laser transmitter and receiver on opposite sides of a yoke as Kawai in view of Morimura’s portions of a non-contact sensor described above in order to better measure the longest cutting edge of a rotating tool or the position of a tool, as taught by Klugger {para. [0078] and Abstract}.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL QUINN whose telephone number is (571)272-2690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30 PST.
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, JOHN BREENE can be reached at (571)272-4107. 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.
/DANIEL M QUINN/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855