Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/252,237

ELECTROCHEMICAL MACHINING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 09, 2023
Examiner
KERR, ELIZABETH M
Art Unit
3761
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Kabushiki Kaisha Toyota Jidoshokki
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
175 granted / 274 resolved
-6.1% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
306
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
50.2%
+10.2% vs TC avg
§102
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
§112
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 274 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 5/9/2023 and 1/10/2025 have been considered by the examiner. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (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. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huttner et al. (US 2022/0355405). Regarding claim 1, Huttner discloses an electrochemical machining apparatus (“ECM System” [Title]; “ (ECM: “electrochemical machining”)” [0002]; Fig. 6, “ECM system 10” [0054]) that electrochemically machines an impeller circumferentially having a plurality of roughly molded vanes (ECM system 10 is shown in Fig. 6 with workpiece / “component 50” [0055] having a plurality of vanes, wherein “at least one electrode 25” circumferentially machines workpiece 50 [0054]-[0056]; EMC system 10 is capable of electrochemically machining an impeller circumferentially having a plurality of roughly molded vanes), comprising: a support that supports the impeller (Fig. 6, support / “holder 12”; “ECM system 10 has a holder 12 for arranging at least one component 50 to be machined” [0054]; support 12 is capable of supporting an impeller); a rotary shaft that holds the support rotatably (Fig. 6, “holder 16 of the exemplary embodiment as defined is designed as movable around the axis of rotation A, in order to move the component 50 arranged thereon into a machining position” [0056]; this indicates the presence of a rotary shaft); and a plurality of electric discharge electrodes (Fig. 6, “at least one electrode 25” [0055]) disposed at equal intervals along a circumference about the rotary shaft (Fig. 6 shows three of “four machining stations 22” [0054] at equal intervals surrounding axis of rotation A, wherein each machining station comprises one electrode 25 [0054]; see also Figs. 4 and 5, which show top views of the four electrodes 25 at equal intervals), and provided so as to be capable of being brought into and out of contact with the plurality of vanes such that one electric discharge electrode corresponds to one vane (“machining stations 22 of the exemplary machining platform 20 have a drive apparatus 23 for driving the electrodes 25 or the electrode carrier 24 on a fixed movement path defined in advance” [0054]); wherein the plurality of electric discharge electrodes each have an electrode surface along a surface to be machined of a corresponding one of the plurality of vanes (each electrode 25 necessarily has an electrode surface along a surface to be machined, since this is required in electrochemical machining), and after the plurality of electric discharge electrodes each move radially inward toward the rotary shaft, the rotary shaft rotates and electrochemical machining is thus performed while the electrode surface and the surface to be machined are close to and thus face each other (see Fig. 6 showing surface of workpiece 50 and electrodes 25; “holder 16 of the exemplary embodiment as defined is designed as movable around the axis of rotation A, in order to move the component 50 arranged thereon into a machining position. Further, supply connections 27 for power and/or media such as, in particular, electrolyte, compressed air, and/or hydraulic fluid are arranged at the machining platform 20. In this case, the electrolyte flow is produced integrally, for example, through the electrode 25 or in a counterflow process, or by means of a pressure chamber (passive or active rinsing chamber) arranged and controlled at the machining platform 20. In the exemplary embodiment, each machining station 22 is operated in stand-alone manner, in particular relative to advance, voltage, electrolyte supply, particularly by means of a control apparatus. Thus, a combination of individual advance is basically also possible with the use of common ECM parameters” [0056]). PNG media_image1.png 552 584 media_image1.png Greyscale Fig. 6 of Huttner 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. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huttner et al. (US 2022/0355405). Regarding claim 3, Huttner does not expressly disclose wherein the support is detachably connected to the rotary shaft. However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the support is detachably connected to the rotary shaft, because the court has held that making components separable may be considered obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961), the claimed structure, a lipstick holder with a removable cap, was fully met by the prior art except that in the prior art the cap is "press fitted" and therefore not manually removable. The court held that "if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the end of [the prior art's] holder to which the cap is applied, it would be obvious to make the cap removable for that purpose." MPEP § 2144.04-V-C. Claims 4 – 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huttner et al. (US 2022/0355405) in view of Williams (US 3,511,767). Regarding claim 4, Huttner discloses a plurality of electrode holders that hold the plurality of electric discharge electrodes such that one electrode holder corresponds to one electric discharge electrode (Fig. 6 shows a plurality of “electrode carrier[s] 24” [0054]; “a positionable electrode carrier 24 is provided at each machining station 22, and at least one electrode 25 is arranged on this carrier in a predetermined position” [0055]; see also Fig. 4, showing an electrode carrier 24 for each electrode 25). Huttner does not expressly disclose a plurality of positioning plates that position the plurality of electric discharge electrodes on the plurality of electrode holders such that one positioning plate corresponds to one electric discharge electrode on one electrode holder. Williams is directed to an “electrode for electrolytic shaping” [Title]. Williams discloses a positioning plate that positions an electric discharge electrode on an electrode holder (Fig. 1, positioning plate / “plate 19; “electrode holder 21”; “On the base portion 3 there is mounted a metal bottom plate and on top of this a waterproof, chemical-resistant plastic mounting plate 19. This is provided with a number of threaded bolt holes to permit mounting of an electrode holder 21, which is made of suitable metal and is provided with one or more mounting slots so that it can be adjusted as to its position by selection of the suitable bolt holes in mounting plate 19” [Col. 3, lines 18-25]. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a plurality of positioning plates that position the plurality of electric discharge electrodes on the plurality of electrode holders such that one positioning plate corresponds to one electric discharge electrode on one electrode holder. This allows for positioning an electrode at a desired location. Regarding claim 5, Huttner does not expressly disclose wherein the plurality of electric discharge electrodes are each detachably connected to a corresponding one of the plurality of electrode holders. However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the plurality of electric discharge electrodes are each detachably connected to a corresponding one of the plurality of electrode holders, because the court has held that making components separable may be considered obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP § 2144.04-V-C. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art of record does not teach, disclose, or suggest the electrochemical machining apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a plurality of nozzles each disposed adjacent to a corresponding one of the plurality of electric discharge electrodes and having a discharge port to discharge an electrolytic solution between the electrode surface and the surface to be machined, wherein the plurality of nozzles each have a concave portion on a side surface thereof that is located at an end portion thereof closer to the discharge port and faces away from the electrode surface. While Huttner discloses supply connections 27 (Fig. 6) for an electrolyte [0056], Huttner does not disclose the claimed structure of the plurality of nozzles. Applicant’s disclosure indicates that the concave portion of the nozzle functions to suppress interference between the nozzle and an adjacent electrode (Applicant’s filed specification at paragraph [0045]). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 3,803,009 discloses a method of producing an impeller by electrolytic fabrication. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH KERR whose telephone number is (571)272-3073. The examiner can normally be reached M - F, 8:30 AM - 4:30 PM. 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, Steven Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5095. 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. /ELIZABETH M KERR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 09, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604370
HIGH VOLTAGE CERAMIC ELECTRIC HEATING ELEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599267
Air circulating roaster
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601502
COOKING APPLIANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594615
WIRE ELECTRIC DISCHARGE MACHINING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583045
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DYNAMIC ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING WELDING PROGRAM PLANNING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+31.7%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 274 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month