DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office Action is responsive to the Applicant's communication filed 10 December 2025. In view of this communication and the amendment concurrently filed, claims 1-8 are now pending in the application.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10 December 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant’s arguments, filed 10 December 2025, have been fully considered and are persuasive.
The Applicant’s argument (pages 5-7 of the Remarks) alleges, regarding the previous grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102, that Seyama does not disclose the amended limitation of claim 1 (i.e. that the permanent magnets of the stators face the coils of the movable elements “in an up-down direction”). Since this limitation now recites the relative positions of the permanent magnets and, specifically, the coils, the argument is persuasive. However, new grounds of rejection have been made, under 35 U.S.C. 103, citing Seyama in view of the Binnard (US 2003/0202167 A1) reference, previously only cited. Binnard 167 discloses a linear motor [16] with a stator comprising permanent magnets [82] and a movable element comprising coils [84], wherein the magnets and coils are arranged in an up-down direction (fig. 1-2; ¶ 0048-0051). Thus, since the difference between the device of Seyama and the claimed device merely constitutes a rearrangement of the working parts of the device, it has been determined to be an obvious matter of design choice. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Disclosure
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seyama et al. (US 2020/0279762 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Seyama”, in view of Binnard (US 2003/0202167 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Binnard 167”.
Regarding claim 1, Seyama discloses a moving device [200] (fig. 6-8; ¶ 0080-0081) comprising:
a first linear guide [112a] that extends in a front-rear direction of the moving device [200] (fig. 6-7; ¶ 0082; the guide extends in the moving, or x-, direction);
a second linear guide [112b] configured to extend in parallel with the first linear guide [112a] (fig. 6-7; ¶ 0082; both guides extend in the x-direction, i.e. are parallel);
a first structure [123A] movable along the first linear guide [112a] (fig. 6-7; ¶ 0082);
a second structure [123c] movable along the second linear guide [112b] (fig. 6-7; ¶ 0082);
PNG
media_image1.png
505
1104
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a slide member [120A] of which a first end is fixed to the first structure [123A] and a second end is fixed to the second structure [123c] so that the slide member [120A] is bridged between the first structure [123A] and the second structure [123c] (fig. 6-8; ¶ 0082-0083);
a first linear motor [135A] having a first stator [130A] installed to extend along the first linear guide [112a] and a first movable element [140A] fixed to the first structure [123A] to face the first stator [130A] at a predetermined interval (fig. 8; ¶ 0083-0084); and
a second linear motor [135c] having a second stator [130c] installed to extend along the second linear guide [112b] and a second movable element [140c] fixed to the second structure [123c] to face the second stator [130c] at a predetermined interval (fig. 8; ¶ 0083-0084; the second linear motor for the slide member is mirrored in the drawings, as the moving device is symmetrical about a central x-axis),
wherein the first movable element [140A] includes first coils [142A] and the second movable element [140c] includes second coils [142c] (fig. 8; ¶ 0083), and
wherein the first stator [130A] and the second stator [130c] each include permanent magnets [132] that respectively face the first coils [142A] of the first movable element [140A] and the second coils [142c] of the second movable element [140c] in a left-right direction of the moving device [200] (fig. 8; ¶ 0083; the permanent magnets of the stators face the “base plate 141A” of each movable element in the vertical, or z-, direction, but face the coils in the horizontal direction).
Seyama does not disclose the permanent magnets of the stators facing the coils of the movable elements in the up-down direction.
Binnard 167 discloses a moving device [10] with linear motors [76A] each having a movable element comprising coils [84] and a stator comprising permanent magnets [82] (fig. 1-2; ¶ 0048-0051), wherein the permanent magnets [82] of the stator face the coils [84] of the movable element in an up-down direction of the moving device [10] (fig. 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
360
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the permanent magnets and coils of Seyama facing one another in the up-down direction as taught by Binnard 167, in order to minimize the influence of the reaction forces on the stage base thereby improving the accuracy of the positioner (¶ 0062-0065, 0168 of Binnard 167). Further, it has been held that merely rearranging the essential working parts of a device would be an obvious matter of design choice. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Regarding claim 2, Seyama, in view of Binnard 167, discloses the moving device [200] according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the first stator [130A] and the second stator [130c] are respectively installed in a flat manner (fig. 8; each stator is comprised of flat surfaces aligned with the flat surfaces of the frame [111]).
Regarding claim 3, Seyama, in view of Binnard 167, discloses the moving device [200] according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the first stator [130A] is installed on a frame [184] of the moving device [200] in the same plane as the first linear guide [112a], and the second stator [130c] is installed on the frame [184] the same plane as the second linear guide [112b] (fig. 6; ¶ 0083; each of the first stator, the second stator, the first linear guide, and the second linear guide extends in the X-direction; as such, a plane can be drawn passing through any two of these components along the X-direction).
Regarding claim 4, Seyama, in view of Binnard 167, discloses the moving device [200] according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the slide member [120A] is attached with a head [170A] at an end portion on a first side in a movement direction (fig. 7; the first mounting head, as best understood to correspond to the recited moving target object, is attached to the underside of the slide member and extends to the left of the slide member in the x-direction) and is fixed at a position deviated from the first structure [123A] and the second structure [123c] on a second side in the movement direction (fig. 7; the first mounting head also extends to the right of the slide member in the x-direction where it is fixed in position by the linear motor [155A]).
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seyama and Binnard 167 as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Zhu et al. (US 2010/0208227 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Zhu”, and Imura et al. (JP 2010-258248 A), hereinafter referred to as “Imura”.
Regarding claim 5, Seyama, in view of Binnard 167, discloses the moving device according to claim 4, as stated above. Seyama does not disclose that the first structure [123A] and the second structure [123c] have a cylindrical portion opened in a direction orthogonal to the movement direction, or that the first structure [123A] and the second structure [123c] have reinforcing portions on both sides of the cylindrical portion in the movement direction.
Zhu discloses a moving device comprising a first/second linear guide [30a] with a first/second structure [35] movable thereon (fig. 3; ¶ 0057-0058), wherein the first/second structure [35] have a cylindrical portion [cp] opened in a direction orthogonal to the movement direction [y] (fig. 2-4; ¶ 0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the first and second structures of Seyama with open cylindrical portions as taught by Zhu, in order to allow for a movable slide member as this would eliminate the need for the additional slide member [160] on which the y-direction linear motor [155] is mounted (fig. 6; ¶ 0081 of Seyama) thereby reducing the weight, number of components, and cost of the moving device.
PNG
media_image3.png
492
744
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Seyama, in view of Binnard 167 and Zhu, still does not disclose that the first structure [123A] and the second structure [123c] have reinforcing portions on both sides of the cylindrical portion [cp] in the movement direction.
Imura discloses a moving device comprising a first/second linear guide [2a] with a first/second structure [5] movable thereon (fig. 1-4; ¶ 0033-0034), wherein the first/second structure [5] have reinforcing portions [6a,6b] on both sides of the {structure} in the movement direction [x] (fig. 1-4; ¶ 0035-0036).
PNG
media_image4.png
274
600
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the first and second structures of Seyama/Binnard 167/Zhu having reinforcing portions on either side in the movement direction as taught by Imura, inherently locating them on either side of the cylindrical portion of Zhu, in order to dissipate the heat of the linear motors thereby preventing deformation of the beam, i.e. slide member (¶ 0036 of Imura).
Regarding claim 6, Seyama, in view of Binnard 167, Zhu, and Imura, discloses the moving device according to claim 5, as stated above, wherein Imura further discloses that the reinforcing portions [6a,6b] are provided asymmetrically (fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, Seyama, in view of Binnard 167, Zhu, and Imura, discloses the moving device according to claim 5, as stated above, wherein Imura further discloses that the first/second structures [5] have fastening portions [4a,4b] configured to fix movable elements [3] corresponding to both sides of the cylindrical portion in the movement direction [x], and have a thin portion [5a] between both fastening portions [4a,4b] of the cylindrical portion (fig. 3-4; ¶ 0037-0039; adding the fasteners on either side, in the x-direction, of the structures would inherently locate them on either side of the cylindrical portion of Zhu).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seyama in view of Binnard 167 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Binnard et al. (US 2003/0034695 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Binnard 695”.
Regarding claim 8, Seyama, in view of Binnard 167, discloses the moving device according to claim 1, as stated above, further comprising:
a first guide nut [126A] slidably attached to the first linear guide [112a] (fig. 6; ¶ 0082); and
a second guide nut [126c] slidably attached to the second linear guide [112b] (fig. 6; ¶ 0082),
wherein the first structure [123A] is supported and fixed on upper surfaces of the first guide nut [126A] (fig. 6, 8), and
the second structure [123c] is supported and fixed on upper surfaces of the second guide nut [126c] (fig. 6, 8).
Binnard 695 discloses a moving device comprising a first/second linear guide [54] with a first/second structure [56] movable thereon (fig. 2; ¶ 0035), further comprising multiple first and second guide nuts [58] slidably attached to the first and second linear guides [54] (fig. 2; ¶ 0035), and
PNG
media_image5.png
528
776
media_image5.png
Greyscale
wherein the first and second structures [56] are supported and fixed on the multiple first guide nuts [58] (fig. 2; ¶ 0035).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to support the first and second structures using multiple guide nuts as taught by Binnard 695, rather than a single guide nut, in order to spread out the weight of the structures thereby reducing friction and in order to distribute support of the structures thereby reducing yawing (¶ 0034-0035 of Binnard 695).
Further, it has been held that the mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 PSQ 8.
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Prior art:
Teramachi (US 4,788,477) discloses a moving device comprising linear guides and structures movable thereon connected to a slide member, and linear motors at each of the linear guides.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Andrews whose telephone number is (571)270-7554. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 8:30am-3:00pm.
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, Oluseye Iwarere can be reached at 571-270-5112. 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.
/Michael Andrews/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834