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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-4 and 6-10 in the reply filed on 10/14/25 is acknowledged.
Claims 5, 11-25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Please note: Applicant elected claims 1-17 without traverse, and within claims 1-17 elected species (i) and listed them as claims 1-4, 6-10, 18-20 and 22-25. This is an error since claims 18-20 and 22-25 are withdrawn claims. Therefore, only the species (i) of the elected claims (1-17) will be considered (i.e. claims 1-4 and 6-10).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 8 recites “a machine, the machine configured to move the came of the tool…”. What are the mets and bounds for the term machine in this context?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, 6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Szewczyk (USP 4,408,507).
Regarding claim 1, Szewczyk discloses a cutting system comprising: a tool comprising a cam (ratchet 96) connected with a cutting insert (70); and a stationary fixture (130) spaced apart from the tool, the stationary fixture comprising a moveable indexing pin (lever 114) moveable relative to the stationary fixture (figures 1 and 5); wherein the cam (96) of the tool is configured to be moved into contact with the moveable indexing pin (114 via paws 98) of the stationary fixture, and the moveable indexing pin of the stationary fixture is configured to cause the cam to rotate thereby indexing the cutting insert (figures 1-5 and col. 3, line 47 through col. 5, line 11).
Regarding claim 4, Szewczyk discloses a plunger (98), the plunger (98) movable relative to the cam and configured to prevent the cam from rotating after the insert is indexed (figure 5 and col 4, lines 35-36).
Regarding claim 6, Szewczyk discloses wherein the stationary fixture comprises a biasing member (122) biasing the moveable indexing pin (114) relative to the stationary fixture (figure 5).
Regarding claim 8, as best understood, Szewczyk discloses a machine, the machine configured to move the cam of the tool into contact with the moveable indexing pin of the stationary fixture, the moveable indexing pin of the stationary fixture configured to index the cutting insert as the machine moves the tool relative to the stationary fixture (figures 1-5 and col. 3, line 47 through col. 5, line 11).
. Regarding claim 9, Szewczyk discloses wherein the tool comprises a tool holder comprising a pocket, the cutting insert (70) disposed within and against the pocket with an interference fit preventing the cutting insert from rotating relative to the pocket, the
pocket configured to be relatively moved away from the cutting insert allowing the cutting insert to rotate (please note: Szewczyk discloses insert backup plate 110 is “The backup plate 110 is generally "C" shaped and is arranged radially adjacent the cutting tool 70 in the end of the tool bar 32 to minimize extraneous movement of the cutting tool 70 with respect to the tool bar 32”, thus reads on the interference fit limitation broadly.
Regarding claim 10, Szewczyk discloses wherein the tool comprises a biasing member (pre-loaded nut 92) biasing the cutting insert towards the pocket.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 3 and 7 re rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Szewczyk (USP 4,408,507).
Regarding claim 2, Szewczyk discloses wherein the cam comprises spaced-apart slots (S: see figure below) disposed around an outer surface of the cam (96), each of the spaced-apart slots extending along a respective longitudinal axis which is disposed at a parallel angle relative to an axis (0) around which the cam is configured to rotate (please note, figure 5/figure below is a sectional view looking down)
[AltContent: textbox (O)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (S)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
341
261
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Szewczyk discloses the slot being parallel to axis O. However, regarding claims 2 and 3, Examiner takes Official Notice that it is old and well known in the machine to select a variety designs for cams depending on the space availability and movement desired. Furthermore, although, Szewczyk discloses wherein the moveable indexing pin (114) of the stationary fixture is configured to move side to side, similarly it can be made to move vertically instead depending on the desired movement, space etc.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARA ADDISU at (571) 272-6082. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm (Mondays and Wednesday-Friday).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sunil K. Singh can be reached on (571) 272-3460. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
/SARA ADDISU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722 11/29/25