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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 22-39, 42-45 drawn to, “A tool changer for changing tools in a machine tool”) in the reply filed on 6/9/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant’s election without traverse of Species i (a first species of the tool changer as shown in at least Figures 2-5 and 7-8) in the reply filed on 6/9/2026 is also acknowledged.
Claims 31, 34, 40, 41, and 46 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group and/or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/9/2026.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a reading device for reading the data carrier” in claim 29.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 22 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 5 of the claim, “it” should be amended to “[[it]] the pivot arm”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 22 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 9 of the claim, “a tool” should be amended to “[[a]] the tool”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 22 is objected to because of the following informalities: On lines 10-12 of the claim, “between one of the tool holders and a tool spindle of the machine tool or between two different tool holders of the tool magazine” should be amended to “between one of the plurality of tool holders and a tool spindle of the machine tool or between two different tool holders of the plurality of tool holders of the tool magazine”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 6 of the claim, “the tool holders” should be amended to “the plurality of tool holders”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 24 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 1 of the claim, “the tool holders” should be amended to “the plurality of tool holders”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 3 of the claim, “a tool” should be amended to “[[a]] the tool”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 4 of the claim, “a combined lifting and pivoting movement” should be amended to “[[a]] the combined lifting and pivoting movement”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 30 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 2 of the claim, “a tool” should be amended to “[[a]] the tool”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 30 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 3 of the claim, “a combined lifting and pivoting movement” should be amended to “[[a]] the combined lifting and pivoting movement”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 33 is objected to because of the following informalities: On lines 3-4 of the claim, “a combined lifting and pivoting movement” should be amended to “[[a]] the combined lifting and pivoting movement”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 33 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 6 of the claim, “a combined lifting and pivoting movement” should be amended to “[[a]] the combined lifting and pivoting movement”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: On each of lines 3, 4, and 6 of the claim, each instance of “a tool” should be amended to “[[a]] the tool”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 4 of the claim, “the tool holders” should be amended to “the plurality of tool holders”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: On lines 4-5 of the claim, “a tool spindle” should be amended to “[[a]] the tool spindle”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: On each of lines 5 and 7 of the claim, each instance of “a combined lifting and pivoting movement” should be amended to “[[a]] the combined lifting and pivoting movement”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 6 of the claim, “two different tool holders of the tool magazine” should be amended to “the two different tool holders of the plurality of tool holders of the tool magazine”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 42 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 1 of the claim, “said one of the tool holders” should be amended to “said one of the plurality of tool holders”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 25, 26, and 43 are 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 25 recites the limitation "the movable tool holder" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggests the following amendment so as to overcome this particular rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: “wherein the one of the plurality of tool holders movably mounted to the support structure
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the movable tool holder" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggests the following amendment so as to overcome this particular rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: “wherein the one of the plurality of tool holders movably mounted to the support structure
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 22, 32, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishida (European Publication No. EP 3566808 A1).
Please note that Nishida is cited on the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 6/7/2023.
Claim 22: Figure 2 of Nishida shows therein a tool changer (100) for changing tools (T) in a machine tool (1). The tool changer (100) comprises a support structure. Please be advised that the support structure is the element in Figure 2 on which a first guide (122) is disposed. The tool changer (100) further comprises a lifting carriage (124) which is guided on the support structure (specifically guided on the first guide (122) thereof) along a lifting direction extending vertically in space. Also, the tool changer (100) comprises a pivot arm (126a) and a tool gripper (126b) (see Figure 3). As to the tool gripper (126b), it is mounted on the pivot arm (126a) and is configured to grip a tool (T).
Regarding the pivot arm (126a), it is pivotably mounted to the lifting carriage (124) so that it is pivotable about a pivot axis extending vertically in space. The tool changer (100) of Nishida further comprises a tool magazine having a plurality of tool holders (112) that are arranged vertically one above the other. Please note that the plurality of tool holders (112) are shown in Figures 2 and 3 as being mounted to a support member (114) which enables the configuration of the plurality of tool holders (112) being arranged vertically one above the other.
Lastly, please be advised that the tool changer (100), via the lifting carriage (124), the pivot arm (126a), and the tool gripper (126b) thereof, is configured to move a tool (T) gripped by the tool gripper (126b) by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (126a) selectively between two different tool holders (112) of the plurality of tools holders (112) of the tool magazine, for example. Please note that due to Applicant’s use of “or” in “between one of the tool holders and a tool spindle of the machine tool or between two different two holders of the tool magazine,” only one of the two limitations separated by “or” had to be satisfied in order for Nishida to read on claim 22.
Claim 32: As can be seen between Figures 5A-5C, the tool gripper (126b) is movably attached to the pivot arm (126a).
Claim 44: The tool gripper (126b) is movably attached to the pivot arm (126a) such that the tool gripper (126b) is pivotable about a vertical gripper pivot axis (see Figures 5A-5C).
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 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (European Publication No. EP 3566808 A1) in view of Kasahara (U.S. PG Publication No. 2018/0222002 A1).
Claim 27: Nishida does not provide disclosure on the tool changer (100) further comprising, “a bulkhead configured to separate an interior space of the tool changer from a machining space of the machine tool, wherein the bulkhead comprises a bulkhead opening, wherein the tool changer comprises a bulkhead door configured to selectively close or open the bulkhead opening, and wherein the pivot arm with the tool gripper mounted thereto is movable through the bulkhead opening in at least one position of the lifting carriage.”
Figure 1 of Kasahara though, shows a bulkhead (54) that is configured to separate an interior space (62) of a tool changer from a machining space (61) of a machine tool, wherein the bulkhead (54) comprises a bulkhead opening (51a) and a bulkhead door (52) configured to selectively close or open the bulkhead opening (51a). Please be advised that the bulkhead opening (51a) is formed in a partition wall (51) of the bulkhead (54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the tool changer (100) of Nishida with the bulkhead (54) of Kasahara so as to provide the advantage of being able to separate a machining space of the machine tool (1) of Nishida from the tool changer (100) of Nishida.
In making the above modification, it is noted that the bulkhead (54) of Kasahara is oriented such that the partition wall (51) thereof is located between the tool changer (100) and the machine tool (1) of Nishida. As such, the bulkhead (54) in the modified Nishida serves to separate an interior space (62) of the tool changer (100) of Nishida from a machining space (61) of the machine tool (1) of Nishida. Further, with this orientation, the bulkhead opening (51a) is also located between the tool changer (100) and the machine tool (1) of Nishida. Noting this, when the bulkhead door (52) is actuated open, the pivot arm (126a) with the tool gripper (126b) mounted thereto is able to be displaced so as to move through the bulkhead opening (51a) in at least one position of the lifting carriage (124).
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (European Publication No. EP 3566808 A1) in view of De Koning (U.S. PG Publication No. 2008/0040911 A1).
Claim 28: Nishida does not provide disclosure on the tool changer (100) further comprising, “a reading station for reading a machine readable data carrier on the tool, wherein the reading station is arranged such that a tool held by the tool gripper is movable to the reading station by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm in order to read the data carrier on the tool.” Be advised that the lifting device (124), support structure with first guide (122), the pivot arm (126a), and the tool gripper (126b) combine to form a robot (120) (see Figure 2 of Nishida).
DeKoning though, shows in Figures 1, 2, and 5 a tool changer (1) comprising a tool magazine (10) in which are stored a plurality of tools (11). DeKoning discloses that a machine readable data carrier, e.g. an RFID, is provided on each tool (11) [paragraphs 0052-0053]. DeKoning also discloses the tool changer (1) having a reading station (20) which is installed either on a robot (3) of the tool changer (1) [paragraph 0054] or at an interchange station (5) [paragraph 0061] of the tool changer (10). Please be advised that an RFID data carrier stores information related to the identity of the tool (11) to which it is affixed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided each tool (T) of the tool changer (100) of Nishida with an RFID machine readable data carrier of DeKoning and to further have provided the tool changer (100) of Nishida with the reading station (20) of DeKoning, so as to provide the tool changer (100) of Nishida with the advantage of being able to accurately identify a given tool (T) by reading the RFID machine readable data carrier affixed thereto with the corresponding reading station (20).
Please be advised that the reading station (20) can be arranged, for example, on the robot (120) of Nishida in accordance with the disclosure of DeKoning. Noting this, through a combined lifting movement of the lifting carriage (124) and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (126a), a given tool (T) is held by the robot (120) via the tool gripper (126b) thereof. Since the given tool (T) is held by the robot (120) and because it is on the robot (120) that the reading station (20) is installed, the reading station (20) is arranged at this moment so as to read the RFID machine readable data carrier on the given tool (T).
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (European Publication No. EP 3566808 A1) in view of Germany Publication No. (DE 202011104037 U1) (hereinafter DE '037).
Please note that DE '037 is cited on the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 6/7/2023.
Please be advised that an EPO Machine Translation of DE '037 is relied upon below. This EPO Machine Translation has been furnished with this office action.
Claim 30: Nishida does not provide disclosure on the tool changer (100) further comprising, “a tool cleaner wherein the tool cleaner is arranged such that a tool held by the tool gripper is movable towards the tool cleaner by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm to clean a tool support of the tool.”
DE '037 though, shows in Figures 3 and 4 a tool changer (12) comprising a cleaning device (28) in which is held a tool cleaner (30) in the form of a brush. Be advised that the tool cleaner (30) is able to be set in rotation [EPO Machine Translation, paragraphs 0077-0081] such that its (30) bristles clean the tool support (13) of a given tool. Please further be advised that the given tool to be cleaned is arranged adjacent the tool cleaner (30) through movement of the given tool from a tool gripper (11) towards the tool cleaner (30) by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of a pivot arm (21). Note that the given tool is held by a tool gripper (22) which is arranged at a distal end of the pivot arm (21). Thus, the tool cleaner (30) is arranged such that the given tool held by the tool gripper (22) is movable towards the tool cleaner (30) by the combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (21) so as to clean the tool support (13) of the given tool.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the tool changer (100) of Nishida with the cleaning device (28) of DE '037, so as to provide the tool changer (100) of Nishida with the advantage of being able to clean the tool support of a selected tool (T) thereof by moving the selected tool (T) to adjacent the tool cleaner (30) of the cleaning device (28) through movement of the lifting device (124), pivot arm (126a), and tool gripper (126b). In making this modification, the tool cleaner (30) is arranged such that the selected tool (T) held by the tool gripper (126b) is movable towards the tool cleaner (30) by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (126a) to clean the tool support of the selected tool (T).
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (European Publication No. EP 3566808 A1) in view of Suzuki (U.S. PG Publication No. 2019/0375066 A1).
Claim 33: Nishida does not provide disclosure on the tool changer (100) further comprising, “at least one of a taper cleaner for cleaning a taper receptacle of the tool spindle, the taper cleaner being grippable by the tool gripper so as to be movable towards the tool spindle by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm, and a measuring probe, wherein the measuring probe is grippable by the tool gripper so that it can be moved into a measuring position by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm.” Please note that Figures 1 and 2 of Nishida show the machine tool (1) as comprising a tool spindle (26), where the tool spindle (26) is configured to the receive the tool support of the tool (T).
Suzuki though, shows in Figure 1 a tool magazine (20) in which is able to be stored a measuring probe (10). Figure 2B shows the measuring probe (10) as comprising a body (12) and a tool support (18). Next, Figure 2C shows that a light emitting window (14) and a light receiving window (16) are provided on the front end (left end in FIG. 2B) of the body (12). Laser light L emitted from a non-contact sensor incorporated in the body (12) is radiated onto a workpiece (W) through the light emitting window (14). Laser light R (reflected light) that has reflected from the surface of the workpiece (w) passes through the light receiving window (16) [paragraph 0055]. Noting this, the measuring probe (10) outputs measurement data corresponding to a distance x from the workpiece (W) at a prescribed time interval (such as every 50 microseconds). A personal computer (40) generates shape data indicating the shape of the workpiece (W) based on measurement data output from the measuring probe (10) and data indicating the location and orientation of the workpiece (W) [paragraph 0051]. Also, please be advised that measuring probe (10) is grippable by a tool gripper (22) so that it can be moved into a measuring position (by means of an intermediate ATC arm (24)) located at a spindle (26) of a machine tool (1). Per Suzuki, the tool support (18) can be removably coupled to the spindle (26) [paragraph 0054].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the tool changer (100) and machine tool (1) of Suzuki with the measuring probe (10) and personal computer (40) of Suzuki, so as to provide Nishida with the advantage of being able to generate shape data of a workpiece based on measurement data output from the measuring probe (10). In making this modification, it is noted that the measuring probe (10) is stored in the tool magazine of the tool changer (100) when not in use. However, when the measuring probe (10) is required in the measuring position (which measuring position corresponds to the tool spindle (26) of the machine tool (1)), said measuring probe (10) is grippable by the tool gripper (126b) so that it (10) can be moved into the measuring position (via an intermediate tool magazine (50) and tool exchange mechanism (60) shown in Figure 3 of Nishida, for example) by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (126a).
Claims 35 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (European Publication No. EP 3566808 A1).
Claim 35: The tool changer further comprises a lifting carriage drive [column 6, lines 22-25] for driving the lifting carriage to perform a lifting movement along the lifting direction.
Next, as can be seen between Figures 5A, 5B, and 5C, the pivot arm (126a) is driven to perform a pivoting movement relative to the lifting carriage (124) about the pivot axis. Based on the movement of the pivot arm (126a) as shown in at least Figures 5A-5C, it is inherent that the tool changer of Nishida further comprises a first pivot drive for driving the pivot arm to perform the aforesaid pivoting movement. Likewise, as can be seen between Figures 5A, 5B, and 5C, the tool gripper (126b) is driven to perform a pivoting movement relative to the pivot arm (126a) about a tool gripper pivot axis. Based on the movement of the tool gripper (126b) as shown in at least Figures 5A-5C, it is inherent that the tool changer of Nishida further comprises a second pivot drive for driving the tool gripper (126b) to perform the aforesaid pivoting movement with respect to the pivot arm (126a).
Nishida though, does not provide disclosure on “a control device configured to control the lifting carriage, the pivot drive and the tool gripper.”
However, Examiner takes Official Notice that the use of a control device to control a lifting carriage drive, a pivot drive, and a tool gripper is well-known and widely-used in the art, and such results in being able to automatically to change a tool as is required because such control enables a spatial location of the tool gripper to be manipulated, and thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the tool changer (100) of Nishida with a control device to control a lifting carriage drive, a pivot drive, and a tool gripper in a tool changer as is well-known, for the purpose of automatically changing a tool (T) in the tool changer (100) of Nishida as is required because a spatial location of the tool gripper (126b) of Nishida is able to be controlled through control of the lifting carriage drive, the pivot drive, and the tool gripper (126b) (i.e. the second pivot drive of the tool gripper) of Nishida.
Claim 36: As was stated above in the rejection of claim 35, the modified tool changer of Nishida comprises a control device to control the lifting carriage drive, pivot drive, and tool gripper (126b) in the tool changer (100) of Nishida. Control over these elements enables a spatial location of the tool gripper (126b) to be manipulated. As such, the control device is configured to effect at least gripping a tool (T) with the tool gripper (126b) (like what is shown within Figure 5A of Nishida, for example) and moving the tool (T) gripped by the tool gripper (126b) between two different tool holders (112) of the plurality of tools holders (112) of the tool magazine, for example, by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (126a).
Claims 22, 24, 25, 27, 32, 35, 36, 43, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horibe (WIPO Publication No. WO 2020049701 A1) in view of Okada (U.S. Patent No. 8,950,987 B2).
Please be advised that an EPO Machine Translation of Horibe is relied upon below. This EPO Machine Translation has been furnished with this office action.
Claim 22: Figure 2 of Horibe shows therein a tool changer for changing tools (30) [EPO Machine Translation, paragraph 0024] in a machine tool (10). As can be seen in Figure 2, the tool changer comprises a support structure (121); a lifting carriage (125) guided on the support structure (121) along a lifting direction extending vertically in space; and a pivot arm (111). Figure 17 of Horibe shows the tool changer as further comprising a tool gripper (111f) mounted on the pivot arm (111) and configured to grip a tool (30).
Next, Figures 2 and 11 show the tool changer as comprising a tool magazine (210) with a plurality of tool holders (217) arranged vertically one above the other. Next, noting the “or” disposed between “selectively between one of the tool holders and a tool or between two different tool holders of the tool magazine,” please be advised that the tool changer of Horibe is configured to move the tool (30) gripped by the tool gripper (111f) by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (111) selectively between two different two holders (217) of the plurality of tool holders (217) of the tool magazine (210). This is achieved through vertical displacement of the tool magazine (210) such that each of the two tool holders (217) is encountered by the tool gripper (111f) one after the other.
With regards to the pivot arm (111), it is shown in at least Figure 2 as being mounted to the lifting carriage (125) so that it (111) is pivotable about a horizontal B-axis. Horibe though, does not provide disclosure on the pivot arm (111) further being “pivotable about a pivot axis extending vertically in space.” Please be advised that Horibe discloses the tool changer as comprising a PROC control unit, which is configured to control pivoting of the pivot arm (111) about the horizontal B-axis [EPO Machine Translation of Horibe, paragraph 0032].
Figures 1 and 2 of Okada though, show a lifting carriage (34) and a head unit (100), the head unit (100) being attached to a lower end of the lifting carriage (34). The head unit (100) is shown in Figure 2 as having an attachment flange (102), and it is this attachment flange (102) that is attached to the lower end of the lifting carriage (34). Noting this, Okada provides disclosure on the lifting carriage (34) accommodating a drive motor (110) for pivoting the head unit (100) about a vertical C-axis [column 4, lines 38-48]. Next, it is noted that Figure 2 of Okada shows the head unit (100) as further having two forked portions (106) between which a pivot arm (118) is mounted. Per Okada et al., the pivot arm (118) is supported so as to be pivotable about a horizontal B-axis by a B-axis drive motor (156), the B and C-axes extending orthogonal to one another [column 5, lines 40-43]. As a result of this construction, a tool that is received by the pivot arm (118) is able to be pivoted about two orthogonal axis (B & C-axes). Also, please note that Figure 7 of Horibe shows a control unit (36) that is configured to control the C-axis drive motor (110) and the B-axis drive motor (156).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have mounted the pivot arm (111) of Horibe to the lifting carriage (125) of Horibe by way of the head unit (100) of Okada and to have provided the lifting carriage (125) of Horibe with the C-axis drive motor (110) of Okada for pivoting the head unit (100) about a vertical C-axis, and it further would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have programmed the PROC control unit of Horibe in accordance with the disclosure of Okada to control, for example, the C-axis drive motor (110) and the B-axis drive motor (156) of the head unit (100), so as to provide Horibe’s tool changer with the advantage of being able to manipulate the pivot arm (111) about each of the vertical C-axis and the horizontal B-axis.
In making the above modification, the head unit (100) of Okada is attached to a lower end of the lifting carriage (125) of Horibe via the attachment flange (102) of the head unit (100). Moreover, the pivot arm (111) of Horibe is mounted between the two forked portions (106) of said head unit (100). Noting this, when a pivot arm (111) is required to be manipulated, it (111) can be pivoted about the horizontal B-axis and further be pivoted about the vertical C-axis.
Based on the foregoing, Horibe/Okada teach the pivot arm (111) as being pivotably mounted to the lifting carriage (125) so that it is pivotable about a pivot axis (the C-axis) extending vertically in space.
Claim 24: First, as can be seen between at least Figures 2, 12, and 13 of Horibe, a tool storage device (200) (of which the tool magazine (210) is an element) is mounted to a vertical column of the support structure (121). Next, Examiner reiterates that the plurality of tool holders (217) are disposed one above the other within the tool magazine (210) (see Figure 5 of Horibe). Noting this, when the tool magazine (210) is vertically displaced from the location shown in Figure 12 of Horibe to the location shown in Figure 13 of Horibe, each of the tool holders (217) (and thus “one of the tool holders (217)”) is moved on the support structure (on the vertical leg thereof) to facilitate loading of the tool magazine (210). Based on the foregoing, Horibe discloses one of the tool holders (217) being mounted movably to the support structure (121) to facilitate loading of the tool magazine (210).
Claim 25: At least Figure 3 of Horibe shows an outer wall (22a+22) separating an interior space of the tool changer from an exterior space, the outer wall (22) having a tool loading opening (SR) for exchanging tools (30) between the interior space and the exterior space. (Please be advised that the “interior space” corresponds to the interior space of the tool magazine (210) shown in at least Figure 6 of Horibe).
Lastly, Figures 12 and 13 of Horibe show the tool magazine (210) and thus the movable tool holder (217) thereof being vertically movable through the tool loading opening (SR).
Claim 27: Figures 3, 5, and 13 of Horibe shows a bulkhead (22a) configured to separate an interior space of the tool changer from a machining space of the machine tool (10), wherein the bulkhead (22a) comprises a bulkhead opening (22b). Figures 5 and 13 show the tool changer as comprising a bulkhead door (216) configured to selectively close or open the opening (22b), and wherein the pivot arm (111) with the tool grippers (111f) mounted thereto is movable through the bulkhead opening (22b) (see Figure 14) in at least one position of the lifting carriage (125).
Claim 32: As broadly claimed, the tool gripper (111f) is movably attached to the pivot arm (111). This is because the tool gripper (111f), which as can be seen in Figure 17 of Horibe is attached to the pivot arm (111), is able to be moved through pivoting of the pivot arm (111) about the horizontal B-axis and/or through pivoting of the pivot arm (111) about the vertical C-axis.
Claim 35: Figure 2 of Horibe shows the tool changer as comprising a lifting carriage drive (120) for driving the lifting carriage (125) to perform a lifting movement along the lifting direction [EPO Machine Translation of Horibe, paragraph 0026].
Next, as was stated above within the rejection of claim 22, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have mounted the pivot arm (111) of Horibe to the lifting carriage (125) of Horibe by way of the head unit (100) of Okada and to have provided the lifting carriage (125) of Horibe with the C-axis drive motor (110) of Okada for pivoting the head unit (100) about a vertical C-axis, and it further would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have programmed the PROC control unit of Horibe in accordance with the disclosure of Okada to control, for example, the C-axis drive motor (110) and the B-axis drive motor (156) of the head unit (100). Please be advised that this C-axis drive motor (110) is a “pivot drive” for driving the pivot arm to perform a pivoting movement relative to the lifting carriage (125) about the (vertical C-axis) pivot axis.
Lastly, Horibe shows in at least Figure 2 the tool changer as comprising a PROC control unit, which is disclosed as being configured to control the lifting carriage drive (120) [EPO Machine Translation of Horibe, paragraph 0025]. Also, noting that the tool gripper (111f) comprises a chuck mechanism (116), Horibe discloses the PROC control unit as commanding the chuck mechanism (116) [EPO Machine Translation of Horibe, paragraph 0082]. Thus, in at least this way, the PROC control unit is configured to control the tool gripper (111g). Lastly, as was stated above, the PROC control unit of Horibe in accordance with the disclosure of Okada, is configured to control the C-axis drive motor (110) for driving the pivot arm to perform a pivoting movement relative to the lifting carriage (125) about the (vertical C-axis) pivot axis.
Claim 36: Noting that the tool gripper (111f) comprises a chuck mechanism (116), Horibe discloses the PROC control unit as commanding the chuck mechanism (116) [EPO Machine Translation of Horibe, paragraph 0082]. Thus, through controlling releasing and grasping of the chuck mechanism (116), the PROC control unit of Horibe is configured to effect at least gripping a tool (30) with the tool gripper (111f).
Claim 43: Figure 3 of Horibe shows the tool changer as comprising a tool loading door (22e) configured to selectively close or open the tool loading opening (SR).
Claim 44: As was stated above in the rejection of claim 22, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have mounted the pivot arm (111) of Horibe to the lifting carriage (125) of Horibe by way of the head unit (100) of Okada and to have provided the lifting carriage (125) of Horibe with the C-axis drive motor (110) of Okada for pivoting the head unit (100) about the vertical C-axis. Next, as can be seen in Figure 17 of Horibe, the tool gripper (111f) is attached to the pivot arm (111). Noting this construction, the (vertical C-axis) pivot axis is not just a pivot axis for the arm (111), but also one for the tool gripper (111f) thereof. As such, the tool gripper (111f) by way of the intervening pivot arm (111) and head unit (100) is pivotable about a vertical gripper pivot axis (which vertical gripper pivot axis corresponds to the aforesaid vertical C-axis).
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horibe (WIPO Publication No. WO 2020049701 A1) in view of De Koning (U.S. PG Publication No. 2008/0040911 A1).
Claim 28: Horibe does not provide disclosure on the tool changer further comprising, “a reading station for reading a machine readable data carrier on the tool, wherein the reading station is arranged such that a tool held by the tool gripper is movable to the reading station by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm in order to read the data carrier on the tool.” Please be advised that at least Figure 3 of Horibe shows the tool magazine (210) and the plurality of tool holders (217) thereof being arranged within an interchange station (22).
DeKoning though, shows in Figures 1, 2, and 5 a tool changer (1) comprising a tool magazine (10) in which are stored a plurality of tools (11). DeKoning discloses that a machine readable data carrier, e.g. an RFID, is provided on each tool (11) [paragraphs 0052-0053]. DeKoning also discloses the tool changer (1) having a reading station (20) which is installed either on a robot (3) of the tool changer (1) [paragraph 0054] or at an interchange station (5) [paragraph 0061] of the tool changer (10). Please be advised that an RFID data carrier stores information related to the identity of the tool (11) to which it is affixed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided each tool (30) of the tool changer of Horibe with an RFID machine readable data carrier of DeKoning and to further have provided the tool changer of Horibe with the reading station (20) of DeKoning, so as to provide the tool changer of Horibe with the advantage of being able to accurately identify a given tool (30) by reading the RFID machine readable data carrier affixed thereto with the corresponding reading station (20).
Please be advised that the reading station (20) can be arranged, for example, within the interchange station (22) of Horibe in accordance with the disclosure of DeKoning. Noting this, through a combined lifting movement of the lifting carriage (125) and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (111), a given tool (30) held by the tool gripper (111f) is movable through a bulkhead opening (22b) to within the interior of tool magazine (210), which is itself is disposed within the interior of the interchange station (22). In other words, through a combined lifting movement of the lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (111), a given tool (30) held by the tool gripper (111f) is movable through the bulkhead opening (22b) to within the interior of the interchange station (22) in which the reading station (20) is arranged. Thus, the reading station (20) is arranged such that the tool (30) held by the tool grippers (111f) is movable to the reading station (20) by the combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (111) in order to read the RFID machine readable data carrier affixed to the tool (30).
Claims 22, 24, 32, 42, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sachot (French Publication No. FR 2546793 A1) in view of Bernhard (U.S. Patent No. 9,475,161 B2).
Please be advised that an EPO Machine Translation of Sachot is relied upon below. This EPO Machine Translation has been furnished with this office action.
Claim 22: Figures 1-2 of Sachot show a tool changer for changing tools in a machine tool, the tool changer comprising a support structure (6+8), a lifting carriage (5) which is guided on the support structure (6+8) along a lifting direction extending vertically in space, a pivot arm (1) which is pivotably mounted to the lifting carriage (5) so that it (1) is pivotable about a pivot axis extending vertically in space, a tool gripper mounted on the pivot arm (see opposing openings formed on the pivot arm (1) which each constitute a respective tool gripper) and configured to grip a tool, and a tool magazine (2) with a plurality of tool holders. Be advised that the tool changer is configured to move a tool (3) gripped by the tool gripper by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (1) between one of the tool holders and a tool spindle (9) (see Figure 2) of the machine tool (which is a milling machine).
Sachot though, does not provide disclosure on the tool magazine (2) being embodied such that the “plurality of tool holders [are] arranged vertically one above the other.”
Figures 1 and 2 of Bernhard though, show a tool magazine (10, 23, 24) comprising each of an upper magazine ring (10) and a lower magazine ring (24) that are connected to one another by means of a circular, annular adapter. As can best be seen in Figure 2, both the upper (10) and lower magazine rings (24) comprise a plurality of tool holders (11). Please note that the plurality of tool holders (11) of the upper magazine ring (10) are disposed vertically above the plurality of tool holders (11) of the lower magazine ring (24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have replaced the tool magazine (2) of Sachot with the tool magazine (10, 23, 24) of Bernhard, so as to provide the tool changer of Sachot with the advantage of increased tool storage capacity.
As such, in the modified tool changer of Sachot, the tool magazine (10, 23, 24), via the upper (10) and a lower magazine rings (24) thereof, comprises a plurality of tool holders (11) arranged vertically one above the other.
Claim 24: Please be advised that prior to replacement, the tool magazine (2) of Sachot was configured for rotation [EPO Machine Translation, page 4, lines 8-9]. Thus, like the tool magazine (2) that it (10, 23, 24) replaced, the tool magazine (10, 23, 24) of Bernhard is movably mounted to the support structure (6, 8) (specifically the vertical column (8) thereof) such that the tool magazine (10, 23, 24) is able to incur rotation within the (modified) tool changer of Sachot.
Noting this, through rotation about a vertical axis, one of the tool holders of the upper magazine ring (10), for example, is able to be indexed in front of an opening of a cover of the tool magazine (10, 23, 24) to facilitate loading of said tool magazine (10, 23, 24). (Please note that the cover of the tool magazine (10, 23, 24) is shown in Figure 1 of Sachot, and Figure 1 shows the pivot arm (1) as extending partially through the opening of said cover).
Claim 32: As broadly claimed, the tool gripper is movably attached to the pivot arm (1). This is because the tool gripper, for example, is able to be moved through pivoting of the pivot arm (1) and lifting carriage (5) about the vertical pivot axis and/or through vertical displacement of the pivot arm (1) and lifting carriage (5) along said vertical pivot axis.
Claim 42: Please be advised that prior to replacement, the tool magazine (2) of Sachot was configured for rotation [EPO Machine Translation, page 4, lines 8-9]. Thus, like the tool magazine (2) that it (10, 23, 24) replaced, the tool magazine (10, 23, 24) of Bernhard is movably mounted to the support structure (6, 8) (specifically the vertical column (8) thereof) such that the tool magazine (10, 23, 24) is able to incur rotation within the (modified) tool changer of Sachot. In incurring rotation, said one of the tool holders of the upper magazine ring (24) is pivoted about a vertical loading pivot axis.
Claim 44: As stated above in the rejection of claim 22, the pivot arm (1) is pivotable about the pivot axis extending vertically in space. Noting this, it is reiterated that the tool gripper is mounted on the pivot arm (see opposing openings formed on the pivot arm (1) which each constitute a respective tool gripper). Thus, when the pivot arm (1) is set in rotation, what occurs is the tool gripper being pivoted about a vertical gripper pivot axis.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sachot (French Publication No. FR 2546793 A1) in view of Bernhard (U.S. Patent No. 9,475,161 B2), and further in view of Holzl (U.S. Patent No. 3,546,774 A).
Claim 23: Figure 1 of Sachot shows the support structure (6, 8) comprising a vertical column (8). Please be advised the lifting carriage (5) is guided “on” the vertical column (8) (by means of the intervening arm (6) of said support structure (6, 8), for example).
Next, it is reiterated that in the rejection of claim 22 that the tool magazine (2) of Sachot was replaced with the tool magazine (10, 23, 24) of Bernhard. Since the tool magazine (2) of Sachot was mounted on the vertical column (8), it follows that the tool magazine (10, 23, 24) of Bernhard is mounted on said vertical column (8) when replacing the tool magazine (2) of Sachot.
As such, the plurality of tool holders (11) of the upper magazine ring (10) and the plurality of tool holders (11) of the lower magazine ring (24) of said tool magazine (10, 23, 24) are each mounted on the vertical column (8).
Sachot though, does not provide disclosure on the vertical column (8) being “mounted at a lower end on a machine bed of the machine tool.” Please note that Figure 2 of Sachot shows a portion of a machine tool (which is embodied as a milling machine). Sachot though, does not provide any indication that either the tool changer or the machine tool/milling machine is disposed upon a machine bed.
Figure 4 of Holzl though, shows a machine bed on which is disposed a machine tool and a tool changer. By each being mounted on the machine bed, stability and levelness is provided to both the machine tool and the tool changer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have mounted each of the tool changer and the machine tool of Sachot on the machine bed of Holzl so as to provide stability and levelness to each of said tool changer and machine tool of Sachot.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 26 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 29, 37-39, and 45 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hansch (Germany Publication No. DE 19510498 A1) shows in Figure 1 thereof a tool changer for changing tools (7) in a machine tool, the tool changer of Hansch comprising a support structure (11), a lifting carriage (14) which is guided on the support structure (11) along a lifting direction extending vertically in space, a pivot arm (15) which is pivotably mounted to the lifting carriage (14), a tool gripper (16) mounted on the pivot arm (15) and configured to grip a tool (7), and a tool magazine (18) with a plurality of tool holders (19) arranged vertically one above the other. Be advised that the tool changer of Hansch is configured to move the tool (7) gripped by the tool gripper (16) by a combined lifting and pivoting movement of the pivot arm (15) selectively between one of the tool holders (19) and a tool spindle (6) of the machine tool or between two different two holders (19) of the tool magazine (18).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Vitale whose telephone number is (571)270-5098. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM- 6:00 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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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.
/MICHAEL VITALE/Examiner, Art Unit 3722
/SUNIL K SINGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3722
Prosecution Insights