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 .
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 “displacement device” with means “to move said support body in space according to at least one degree of freedom to exert a finishing action on said three-dimensional surface by said finishing member which is engaged to said support body”. The “displacement device” is identified as numeral ‘40’, wherein the specification states that the “displacement device 40 can be an anthropomorphic robot,” which one of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize as equivalents thereof as being capable of being a displacement device. The “displacement device” is considered a robot, or equivalents thereof, for performing the given function.
a “control unit” with means “to operate said displacement device to move said support body according to said at least one degree of freedom”. Applicant identifies the “control unit” as numeral ‘300’ and describes the “control unit” in a way that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand as a computer, processor, controller, or equivalents thereof, for performing the claimed function(s) of the control unit (“the control unit 300 can be arranged to elaborate the data deriving from the model in digital format, for example the aforementioned CAD model, of the surface to be finished, or by the detection device to operate the displacement device 40, or the second displacement device 140, of the raw member 20′, and/or the secondary displacement device 85 of the shaping member 75, accordingly”) [Application Publication; paragraph 0086].
a “shaping station” with means “to give a predetermined shape to a raw member having at least one spatial dimension greater than at least one spatial dimension of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished to obtain said finishing member”. Applicant identifies the “shaping station” as numeral ‘250’ and states that the “shaping station” includes a “shaping member 75” for giving a determined shape to a raw member (“at the shaping station 250 a shaping member 75 is provided configured to give a determined shape to the raw member 20′”) [Application Publication; paragraph 0064]. “[T]he shaping member 75 can be a tool configured to remove material from the raw member 20′ by mechanical contact. In particular, as shown in the FIGS. 4, 20 and 21, the shaping member 75 can be a diamond disc, or a cutter having for example a conical shape (FIG. 24), or a cylindrical shape, case that is not shown in the figure for simplicity, or even, a cutting blade, advantageously, shaped (FIG. 20).” [Application Paragraph 0071]. “Alternatively, the shaping member 75 can be a device for subjecting the raw member 20′ to a specific treatment, in particular a thermal treatment and, therefore, able to remove the excess material with respect to the aforementioned predetermined shape with no mechanical contact with it. For example, as diagrammatically shown in FIG. 22, the device for carrying out the thermal treatment 75 can be configured to emit a laser beam.” [Application Publication; paragraph 0072]. For examination purposes, the “shaping station” is considered a station with a shaping tool therein, wherein the shaping tool is a tool mentioned herein and equivalents thereof.
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 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(s) 1-5, 7-10, 13-17, 19, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weston (US-2006/0111032) in view of Kish (US-3,921,616), and further in view of Gu (US-2015/0005923).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Weston (US-2006/0111032) discloses an apparatus for finishing a three-dimensional surface having a profile with a predetermined geometry, said apparatus comprising:
- a support body (tool drive shaft 22) configured to removably engage a finishing member (finishing element 24) (Figs. 1 and 2);
- a displacement device (the movement mechanism of a CNC machine, i.e. “a CNC machine tool”) [Weston; paragraph 0042] configured to move said support body (tool drive shaft 22) in space according to at least one degree of freedom to exert a finishing action on said three- dimensional surface by said finishing member (finishing element 24) which is engaged to said support body (tool drive shaft 22) (“a finishing tool can be coupled to a rotary drive mechanism, such as, for example, a router (FIG. 3A), a wood shaper (FIG. 3B), a drill (FIG. 4), a table saw (FIGS. 9A and 9B), a planer or moulder (FIG. 10), or a CNC machine tool”) [Weston; paragraph 0042] (CNC machines are computer numerical controlled machined where the CNC moves the rotary bit, movement requiring at least one degree of freedom);
- a control unit (“computer numerical control” portion of the CNC machine) configured to operate said displacement device (the movement mechanism of the CNC machine) to move said support body (tool drive shaft 22) according to said at least one degree of freedom (“a finishing tool can be coupled to a rotary drive mechanism, such as, for example, a router (FIG. 3A), a wood shaper (FIG. 3B), a drill (FIG. 4), a table saw (FIGS. 9A and 9B), a planer or moulder (FIG. 10), or a CNC machine tool”) [Weston; paragraph 0042], but fails to disclose wherein at least a shaping station is provided at which a shaping member is provided configured to give a predetermined shape to a raw member having at least one spatial dimension greater than at least one spatial dimension of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished (where the blank is larger than the finished product to be machined/manufactured) to obtain said finishing member and in that wherein said control unit is configured to cause a relative motion according to at least two degrees of freedom of said raw member and of said shaping member at said shaping station on the basis of said predetermined geometry of said profile, in such a way to reproduce said predetermined geometry of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished at a predetermined portion of said raw member thus obtaining this way said finishing member comprising at least one portion with an external surface having a profile with a geometry equal, or substantially equal, to the geometry of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished.
However, Kish (US-3,921,616) teaches wherein at least a shaping station is provided at which a shaping member (bar type molybdenum tool 8) is provided configured to give a predetermined shape to a raw member (the grinding wheel 1 before truing) having at least one spatial dimension greater than at least one spatial dimension of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished to obtain said finishing member (grinding wheel 1) (The truing process removes material in order to achieve a shape as shown in Figure 5. The shapes in Figure 5 would represent the “said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished to obtain said finishing member,” according to Weston where the surface to be finished matches the profile of the tool.), thus obtaining this way said finishing member comprising at least one portion with an external surface having a profile with a geometry equal, or substantially equal, to the geometry of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished. Since Weston teaches requiring a tool of a specific and desired shape, it therefore would’ve been obvious to use a shaping station, such as taught by Kish, in order to shape the finishing/grinding tool of Weston. Kish fails to teach in that wherein said control unit is configured to cause a relative motion according to at least two degrees of freedom of said raw member and of said shaping member at said shaping station on the basis of said predetermined geometry of said profile.
Gu (US-2015/0005923) teaches wherein a control unit is configured to cause a relative motion according to at least two degrees of freedom of said raw member (workpiece 50) and of said shaping member (tool 36) on the basis of said predetermined geometry of said profile (“In the preparatory process, the settings of the visual sensor, i.e., teaching of the model of the workpiece 50, and settings of various parameters are carried out in order to allow the visual sensor to detect a position of the workpiece 50.”) [Gu; paragraph 0066]. Since automated robots for grinding are known in the art, as shown by Gu, it would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to automate the shaping member of Weston in view of Kish with a robot arm , movable in multiple axes, in order to automatically and precisely shape the workpiece (“a robot program creating part for creating a robot program which includes at least a robot operating command for controlling the robot”) [Gu; paragraph 0013].
Regarding claim 2 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three-dimensional surface according to claim 1, wherein said displacement device (the movement mechanism of a CNC machine, i.e. “a CNC machine tool”) [Weston; paragraph 0042] is configured to engage said raw member (the finishing element 24 before it is in final form before truing) at said support body (drive shaft 22) and to move said raw member with respect to said shaping member (bar type molybdenum tool 8 of Kish) at said shaping station (station with bar type molybdenum tool 8 of Kish) in such a way to obtain said finishing member (the finishing element 24), said displacement device (CNC machine tool) being then arranged to move said support body (drive shaft 22) with respect to said three-dimensional surface to finish said three- dimensional surface by said finishing member (“a finishing tool can be coupled to a rotary drive mechanism, such as, for example, a router (FIG. 3A), a wood shaper (FIG. 3B), a drill (FIG. 4), a table saw (FIGS. 9A and 9B), a planer or moulder (FIG. 10), or a CNC machine tool”) [Weston; paragraph 0042].
Regarding claim 3 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 1, wherein a supplementary displacement device (the robot arm of Gu used to move the bar type molybdenum tool 8 of Kish for machining the finishing tool) is, furthermore, provided configured to move at said shaping station (station with tool 8 of Kish) said shaping member (tool 8 of Kish) with respect to said raw member (finishing element 24 before it has been shaped) arranged to be engaged at said support body (tool drive shaft 22) in such a way to obtain said finishing member (finishing element 24).
Regarding claim 4 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 3, wherein said displacement device (CNC machine for moving the finishing element 24 of Weston) and said supplementary displacement device (the robot arm taught by Gu for moving the tool 8 of Kish) are arranged to move one with respect to the other to reproduce said predetermined geometry of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished at a determined portion of said raw member and, thus, to obtain said finishing member (Gu shows relative movement between tools for shaping) (Gu; Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 5 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 2, wherein said control unit is configured to operate said displacement device (CNC machine for moving finishing element 24) and/or said supplementary displacement device (robot arm, as made obvious by Gu, for holding the tool 8 of Kish for shaping the finishing element 24 of Weston) at said shaping station (station where tool 8 is) to move said raw member (finishing element 24 before it is shaped into final form) and said shaping member (tool 8 of Kish) one with respect to the other according said at least two degrees of freedom on the basis of a model designed by a design software and reproducing said profile of said surface to be finished (Gu shows in Figure 14 where a robot arm is used to automatically machine the profile of a workpiece, said robot arm being combined with the tool of Kish, as made obvious by Gu).
Regarding claim 7 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 1, wherein said raw member (the finishing element 24) is made of a material having a hardness that is lower than the hardness of the material of said shaping member (truing tool 8 of Kish) (While the hardness is not disclosed, official notice is taken that, within the art of abrading, the hardness of the abrasive must be harder than the material being abraded, wherein the one with less hardness is worn away from relative contact. Therefore, it would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a truing tool that is harder than the material it is truing so that the truing tool is both capable of removing the material from the finishing element 24 of Weston, and so the truing tool is not destroyed, as is well-known in the abrasive arts).
Regarding claim 8 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 1, wherein said raw member (finishing element 24 before it’s formed/shaped) is made of a material selected from the group comprising (“the finishing element 24 is formed of a rigid or semi-rigid material, such as foam, metal fiber, composite fiber, plastic, felt, rubber, polymers, or a combination of these”) [Weston; paragraph 0035]:
- felt;
- sponge;
- a material formed by non-woven synthetic fibres;
- a polymer formed by non-woven fibres selected from the group of: cellulose, nylon, or polypropylene;
- a material formed by non-woven synthetic fibres impregnated with abrasive granules;
- a material formed by non-woven synthetic fibres impregnated with abrasive granules of aluminium oxide and silicon carbide;
- a material formed by non-woven synthetic fibres impregnated with abrasive granules of titanium dioxide.
Regarding claim 9 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 1, wherein said shaping member (molybdenum tool 8 of Kish) is made of a material selected from the group comprising: a metallic material, a diamond disc (molybdenum is a transition metal with metallic properties).
Regarding claim 10 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 1, wherein said shaping member (tool 8 of Kish) is configured to subject said raw member (the finishing element 24 before being shaped) to a thermal treatment (friction is considered a thermal treatment).
Regarding claim 13 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 1, wherein said displacement device (CNC machine) is configured to rotate said finishing member (finishing element 24) about a rotation axis (axis of tool drive shaft 22) with respect to said three-dimensional surface (workpiece surface) to be finished during the finishing action (“In the embodiment shown in FIG. 2, tool drive 22 includes a shank 32 to secure the tool drive into a rotary drive such as a router or a drill.”) [Weston; paragraph 0036].
Regarding claim 14 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to a claim 1, wherein at said shaping station said raw member (the finishing tool 24 before it is formed in the final shape) is moved with respect to said shaping member (tool 8 of Kish) (as modified by Gu, where the workpiece is held by one robot arm and machined by a tool in another robot arm, as shown in Figure 14 of Gu) in such a way that said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished is reproduced at the external surface of said finishing member (finishing member 24) in such a way to be symmetric with respect to said rotation axis (Weston’s finishing member 24 is symmetrical).
Regarding claim 15 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 1, wherein said raw member has a shape selected from the group consisting of:
- a substantially prismatic shape;
- a substantially cylindrical shape (Figs. 2C, 2F, 2H);
- a substantially spherical shape;
- a substantially conical shape (Figs. 2G and 2I).
Regarding claim 16 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 1, wherein said shaping member is configured to shape said raw member by removing excess material up to obtaining said shape of said profile (Figs. 1-4 of Kish) having a geometry equal, or substantially equal, to said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished (Weston’s finishing element 24 has a shape meant to be equal to or substantially equal to said three dimension surface to be finished) (“Thus, when the cutter bit 70 is used to cut a workpiece, forming a profile in the workpiece, the finishing element 24 can be positioned into the workpiece profile to sand, abrade, polish, or smooth the workpiece surface.”) [Weston; paragraph 0041].
Regarding claim 17 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein said surface to be worked has a complex geometry comprising a plurality of portions with a different radius of curvature (Figs. 2C-2I show the tool that will create a mirrored surface on the surface to be worked).
Regarding claim 19 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein a second displacement device is provided configured to position said raw member at said shaping station and/or to move said raw member with respect to said shaping member.
However, it would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to shape the abrasive tool of Weston by using a second displacement device, such as a robot arm, to position said raw member (the finishing element 24 before dressing) at said shaping station and/or to move said raw member with respect to said shaping member, as taught by Gu, in order to prevent downtime while the tool is being dressed.
Regarding claim 21 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses a method for finishing a three-dimensional surface having a profile with a predetermined geometry, said method comprising the steps of:
- providing an apparatus for finishing surfaces comprising a support body (tool drive shaft 22) configured to removably engage a finishing member (finishing element 24) (Figs. 1 and 2);
- moving said support body (tool drive shaft 22) in space according to at least one degree of freedom to exert a finishing action on said three- dimensional surface by said finishing member (finishing element 24) which is engaged to said support body (tool drive shaft 22) (“a finishing tool can be coupled to a rotary drive mechanism, such as, for example, a router (FIG. 3A), a wood shaper (FIG. 3B), a drill (FIG. 4), a table saw (FIGS. 9A and 9B), a planer or moulder (FIG. 10), or a CNC machine tool”) [Weston; paragraph 0042] (CNC machines are computer numerical controlled machined where the CNC moves the rotary bit, movement requiring at least one degree of freedom);
- moving said support body (tool drive shaft 22) according to said at least one degree of freedom (“a finishing tool can be coupled to a rotary drive mechanism, such as, for example, a router (FIG. 3A), a wood shaper (FIG. 3B), a drill (FIG. 4), a table saw (FIGS. 9A and 9B), a planer or moulder (FIG. 10), or a CNC machine tool”) [Weston; paragraph 0042], but fails to disclose wherein at least a shaping station is provided at which a shaping member is provided configured to give a predetermined shape to a raw member having at least one spatial dimension greater than at least one spatial dimension of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished (where the blank is larger than the finished product to be machined/manufactured) to obtain said finishing member and in that wherein said control unit is configured to cause a relative motion according to at least two degrees of freedom of said raw member and of said shaping member at said shaping station on the basis of said predetermined geometry of said profile, in such a way to reproduce said predetermined geometry of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished at a predetermined portion of said raw member thus obtaining this way said finishing member comprising at least one portion with an external surface having a profile with a geometry equal, or substantially equal, to the geometry of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished.
However, Kish (US-3,921,616) teaches wherein at least a shaping station is provided at which a shaping member (bar type molybdenum tool 8) is provided configured to give a predetermined shape to a raw member (the grinding wheel 1 before truing) having at least one spatial dimension greater than at least one spatial dimension of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished to obtain said finishing member (grinding wheel 1) (The truing process removes material in order to achieve a shape as shown in Figure 5. The shapes in Figure 5 would represent the “said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished to obtain said finishing member,” according to Weston where the surface to be finished matches the profile of the tool.), thus obtaining this way said finishing member comprising at least one portion with an external surface having a profile with a geometry equal, or substantially equal, to the geometry of said profile of said three-dimensional surface to be finished. Since Weston teaches requiring a tool of a specific and desired shape, it therefore would’ve been obvious to use a shaping station, such as taught by Kish, in order to shape the finishing/grinding tool of Weston. Kish fails to teach in that wherein said control unit is configured to cause a relative motion according to at least two degrees of freedom of said raw member and of said shaping member at said shaping station on the basis of said predetermined geometry of said profile.
Gu (US-2015/0005923) teaches wherein a control unit is configured to cause a relative motion according to at least two degrees of freedom of said raw member (workpiece 50) and of said shaping member (tool 36) on the basis of said predetermined geometry of said profile (“In the preparatory process, the settings of the visual sensor, i.e., teaching of the model of the workpiece 50, and settings of various parameters are carried out in order to allow the visual sensor to detect a position of the workpiece 50.”) [Gu; paragraph 0066]. Since automated robots for grinding are known in the art, as shown by Gu, it would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to automate the shaping member of Weston in view of Kish with a robot arm , movable in multiple axes, in order to automatically and precisely shape the workpiece (“a robot program creating part for creating a robot program which includes at least a robot operating command for controlling the robot”) [Gu; paragraph 0013].
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weston (US-2006/0111032) in view of Kish (US-3,921,616), and further in view of Gu (US-2015/0005923) and Lorenz (US-4,533,812).
Regarding claim 11 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein said shaping member is configured to emit a laser beam.
However, Lorenz (US-4,533,812) teaches the use of a laser beam as a shaping member (“The rotatably driven tool is profiled or shaped in the region of the cutting surface by a clustered electron or laser beam which is controlled in a course corresponding to the prescribed shape or contour of the tool”) [Lorenz; Abstract]. Since a shaping member configured to emit a laser beam is a known type of tool for shaping and profiling a cutting surface of an abrasive material, even super-hard materials, it therefore would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a laser beam in order to shape and profile the finishing element 24 of Weston.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weston (US-2006/0111032) in view of Kish (US-3,921,616), and further in view of Gu (US-2015/0005923) and Makis (US-2019/0291225).
Regarding claim 12 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus for finishing a three- dimensional surface according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein said displacement device (CNC machine) is configured to move said support body in space with respect to 6 degrees of freedom.
However, it would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include multiple axis of freedom, up to and including 6 degrees of freedom, as is known in the art and shown by Makis (US-2019/0291225) (“The manipulator can be multiaxial. For example, it may comprise a 6-axis industrial robot. In addition, it is conceivable that the manipulator comprises a kinematics that allows degrees of freedom comparable to a 6-axis design.”) [Makis; paragraph 0009] in order to allow for a larger range of motion for movement.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weston (US-2006/0111032) in view of Kish (US-3,921,616), and further in view of Gu (US-2015/0005923) and Jansson (US-2008/0020685).
Regarding claim 18 (Currently Amended), Weston, as modified, discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein said displacement device (CNC machine for moving finishing element 24) is furthermore arranged to move said raw member at said shaping station.
However, Jansson (US-2008/0020685) teaches that it is known to use a truing device, such as that taught by Kish, in-situ where the finishing element is held (Fig. 1 of Jansson shows a rotatable grindstone 1 in a grinding machine with the truing device 6 being used while the grinding wheel is in the machine). Therefore, it would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to shape the raw material (i.e. the finishing element 24 of Weston before it is dressed) while in the displacement device of Weston, as taught by Jansson, as in-situ is more convenient and less time consuming so that the tool does not have to be removed and placed in a different station before truing.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 6, the prior art of Weston does not measure the “surface to be finished” using “a detection device” in order to “operate said displacement device and/or said supplementary displacement device.” Rather, Weston, as modified, merely makes obvious entering a desired profile to shape the finishing element 24 and/or the three-dimensional surface to be finished, rather than measuring a surface to be finished.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US-6273795, US-2947302, and US-20180161952 are pertinent to claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL DILLON CRANDALL whose telephone number is (571)270-5947. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 - 5:30.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-270-5947. 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.
/JOEL D CRANDALL/Examiner, Art Unit 3723