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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 May 4, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This Non-final Rejection is in response to the Response After Final Action dated May 4, 2026 filed in response to the Final Rejection dated February 6, 2026.
The 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection in the previous Office action is withdrawn in view of the amendment to claim 1 distinguishing the claim over the cited prior art. However, claims continue to be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) based upon new grounds necessitated by the claim amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7 and 8, filed May 4, 2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-14 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of the amendment made to claim 1 as explained below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-2, 9 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Japanese Patent Publication No. JP S63-238917 A by Morita et al., hereinafter “Morita”.
Regarding claim 1, Morita discloses an operating method for a roll stand for rolling flat metal rolling stock (operating method for roll stands STi in Fig. 1 rolling flat metal rolling stock 1; page 8-9),
determining, with a position regulator that regulates positioning of an actuator that sets a roll gap of the roll stand, an actuating variable (q) for the actuator as a function of a resulting position target value (s*) and a position actual value (s) of the actuator; and activating, with the position regulator, the actuator accordingly (control unit 6 in Fig. 1 is a position regulator which regulates positioning of actuator reduction device 3 that sets the roll gap of roll stand STi by determining an actuating variable ΔS for device 3 as a function of the resulting position target value calculated by thickness control adjuster 15 in Fig. 2 and the position actual value S),
wherein the resulting position target value (s*) is determined by use of a resulting base target value (s 1*) (the resulting position target value calculated by adjuster 15 is determined by using resulting base target value Δh in Fig. 2),
wherein the resulting base target value (s 1*) is determined as the sum of an initial base target value (s0*) and an additional target value (δs1*) (resulting base target value Δh in Fig. 2 is determined as the sum of initial base target value ΔS0 and additional target value ΔP/M calculated by calculator 13 in Fig. 2 at adder 14),
wherein the additional target value (δs1*) is determined by a determination element by the use of an inlet-side actual tension (ZE), or a corresponding target tension (ZE*) of an inlet- side tension regulating system, and an inlet-side reference tension (ZER) and/or by the use of an outlet-side actual tension (ZA), or a corresponding target tension (ZA*) of an outlet-side tension regulating system, and an outlet-side reference tension (ZAR) (additional target value ΔP/M is determined by determination element tension corrector 16 in Fig. 2 which uses inlet-side actual tension ti-1 and outlet-side actual tension ti measured by tension detectors 8 and 7 in Fig. 1),
wherein the inlet-side reference tension (ZER) is a different variable from the inlet-side target tension (ZE*) and/or the outlet-side reference tension (ZAR) is a different variable from an outlet-side target tension (ZA*) (since additional target value ΔP/M is determined using actual tension, Morita does not necessarily need to disclose this limitation of the claim to anticipate the claim because the previous limitation is a conditional “or” limitation), and
wherein the initial base target value (s0*) is independent of the inlet-side actual tension (ZE) and the outlet-side actual tension (ZA) and is determined by a higher-order control device based on a rolling model in which the rolling procedure in the roll stand is modeled based on mathematical physical equations (initial base target value ΔS0 is independent of the inlet-side and outlet-side actual tensions and is determined by a higher-order control device which calculates initial setting value S0 as part of the roll pass schedule used to set the initial value of S0 in the roll stands of Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2, Morita anticipates the operating method as claimed in claim 1 as explained above. Morita further discloses the roll stand is operated by regulating the roll gap. Reduction device 3 in Fig. 1 operates roll stand STi by regulating the gap between rolls 2 as disclosed in the bottom half of page 2.
Regarding claim 9, Morita anticipates the operating method as claimed in claim 1 as explained above. Morita further discloses the resulting position target value (s*) (the value calculated by thickness control adjuster 15 in Fig. 2) is determined at least during the rolling of a central portion of the rolling stock by the use of a correction value (δs2*) determined by the use of an actual rolling force (F) (Fig. 3(ii) and the disclosure of pages 5-6 disclose how actual rolling force P in Fig. 2 is corrected in tension corrector 16).
Regarding claim 13, Morita discloses a control system for a roll stand for rolling a flat rolling stock (the control system shown in Fig. 1), wherein the control system is formed by hardware blocks (hardware block reduction device 3 in Fig. 1) and/or software programs (software program operating control unit 6 in Fig. 1) in such a way that during operation it implements an operating method as claimed in claim 1 (the control system shown in Fig. 1 implements the operating method as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 14, Morita discloses a rolling unit for rolling flat metal rolling stock, wherein the rolling unit has a roll stand for rolling the flat rolling stock and a control system as claimed in claim 13. Fig. 1 shows a rolling unit with roll stand STi being controlled by the control system as claimed in claim 13 as explained above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-8 and 10-12 are 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Morita does not disclose nor teach the specificities of claims 3-8 and 10-12. Examiner is of the opinion it would require impermissible levels of hindsight to combine Morita with other prior art reference to arrive at the invention as claimed in claims 3-8 and 10-12.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL DEREK PRESSLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-6658. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 3:30pm Eastern.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
/P DEREK PRESSLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights