DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 07/27/2023 and 06/04/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ono et al. (JP 2004232649; hereinafter “Ono”; English translation provided by the Examiner).
Regarding claim 1, Ono teaches a U-bolt (Figures 1-2), comprising:
a pair of shaft parts (A and B; See annotated Figure 1), the pair of shaft parts (A and B) is placed in a first direction and extending in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (shafts A and B are placed in the direction parallel to element 16 and both shafts A and B extend in the upwards direction, which is orthogonal to the direction of element 16; See annotated Figure 1), and a bridge part (See annotated Figure 1) connecting one end of each of the pair of shaft parts (Figure 1 demonstrates the bridge part connection to each end of the pair of shafts A and B; See annotated Figure 1), wherein a strain detection pattern (11 and 13; Figure 1; [0019]) is attached on at least a part of at least one shaft part of the pair of shaft parts (11 and 13 is placed on the outer surface of shaft A; the visual exposure of the markings 13 will be an indication of how much of the shaft A has been inserted relative to the nut 9 when nut 9 is tightened; therefore, the markings 13 will indicate how much force/strain the shaft A is experimenting due to the tightening of nut 9; See annotated Figure 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
720
743
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Ono teaches wherein the strain detection pattern (11 and 13) is attached between one surface of a fastened object (16; Figure 1) and a boundary between the shaft part and the bridge part in the at least one shaft part (Annotated Figure 1 demonstrates that 11 and 13 is placed between element 16 and the boundary of the shaft A and the bridge part) in a state where the pair of shaft parts (A and B) are inserted into a pair of through-holes provided in the fastened object (shafts A and B are inserted into the holes of element 16; See Figure 1) and a fastening object (4; Figure 1) is sandwiched and fixed by the U-bolt and one surface of the fastened object (fastening object 4 is sandwiched and fixed by shafts A and B, the bridge part and element 16; See annotated Figure 1).
Regarding claim 9, Ono teaches wherein the U-bolt (shafts A and b along with bridge part; annotated Figure 1) fixes a fastening object (4; Figure 1) to a fastened object (16; Figure 1) using a nut (9; Figure 1).
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.
Claims 3, 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ono in view of Sonoki et al. (JP 6751930; hereinafter Sonoki; English translation provided by the Examiner).
Regarding claim 3, Ono teaches the strain detection pattern but does not expressly teach the detection pattern being a speckle pattern.
However, Sonoki teaches that is known in the art to use speckle pattern (pattern 1b; Figures 1c; [0018, 0050]) on an object (3; Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Sonoki’s speckle pattern implemented as Ono’s detection pattern in order to use an imaging device to determine the displacement of the object which has said pattern and determine in an automated manner the displacement of the object, this reduces human prone error when it comes to displacement determination.
Regarding claim 8, Ono teaches the strain detection pattern but does not expressly teach the detection pattern being a lattice pattern.
However, Sonoki teaches that is known in the art to use lattice pattern (pattern 1b produces a white lattice pattern; Figures 1c; [0018, 0050]) on an object (3; Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Sonoki’s lattice pattern implemented as Ono’s detection pattern in order to use an imaging device to determine the displacement of the object which has said pattern and determine in an automated manner the displacement of the object, this reduces human prone error when it comes to displacement determination.
Regarding claim 11, Ono teaches the strain detection pattern but does not expressly teach the detection pattern being a speckle pattern or lattice pattern.
However, Sonoki teaches that is known in the art to use speckle pattern (pattern 1b; Figures 1c; [0018, 0050]) on an object (3; Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Sonoki’s speckle pattern implemented as Ono’s detection pattern in order to use an imaging device to determine the displacement of the object which has said pattern and determine in an automated manner the displacement of the object, this reduces human prone error when it comes to displacement determination.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 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.
In claim 10, the specific limitations of "wherein the strain detection pattern enables the U-bolt fixing a fastening object in balance by fastening without increasing a difference of strain between the strain detection pattern and another strain detection pattern attached to the U-bolt" in combination with the remaining limitations as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Claims 4-7 and 12-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 4, Ono teaches a construction method (Figures 1-2) for fastening a U-bolt (Shafts A and B along with bridge part; See annotated Figure 1), the method comprising:
a part of the at least one shaft part (A; See annotated Figure 1) to which a strain detection pattern (11 and 13; Figure 1) is attached, wherein the U-bolt comprises a pair of shaft parts (A and B; See annotated Figure 1) placed in a first direction, extending in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (shafts A and B are placed in the direction parallel to element 16 and both shafts A and B extend in the upwards direction, which is orthogonal to the direction of element 16; See annotated Figure 1), and fastened by a pair of nuts (9;l Figure 1), and a bridge part (bridge part; See annotated Figure 1) connecting one end of each of the pair of shaft parts (Figure 1 demonstrates the bridge part connection to each end of the pair of shafts A and B; See annotated Figure 1) and in which the strain detection pattern (11 and 13) is attached on at least a part of at least one shaft part of the pair of shaft parts (11 and 13 is placed on the outer surface of shaft A; the visual exposure of the markings 13 will be an indication of how much of the shaft A has been inserted relative to the nut 9 when nut 9 is tightened; therefore, the markings 13 will indicate how much force/strain the shaft A is experimenting due to the tightening of nut 9; See annotated Figure 1) to a fastened object (16; Figure 1).
Sonoki teaches generating a first observation image by imaging a pattern region ([0009, 0030]), generating a second observation image by imaging the pattern region ([0009, 0030]).
In claim 4, the specific limitations of "generating a first observation image by imaging a pattern region which is at least a part of the at least one shaft part to which a strain detection pattern is attached; generating a second observation image by imaging the pattern region after fastening of the shaft part by a nut of the pair of nuts is adjusted; detecting a strain of the pattern region on the basis of the first observation image and the second observation image; and outputting fastening information related to fastening of the shaft part by the nut on the basis of the strain" in combination with the remaining limitations as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Claims 5 and 12-16 are also allowed for depending on claim 4.
Regarding claim 6, Ono teaches a U-bolt (Figure 1), a pattern region (11 and 13) which is at least a part of at least one shaft part (A; annotated Figure 1) to which a strain detection pattern (11 and 13) is attached, fastening of the at least one shaft part (A) by a nut is adjusted (9; Figure 1), wherein the U-bolt (Figure 1) comprises a pair of shaft parts (A and B; See annotated Figure 1) placed in a first direction, extending in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (shafts A and B are placed in the direction parallel to element 16 and both shafts A and B extend in the upwards direction, which is orthogonal to the direction of element 16; See annotated Figure 1), and fastened by a pair of nuts (9;l Figure 1), and fastened by a pair of nuts (9), and a bridge part (annotated Figure 1) connecting one end of each of the pair of shaft parts (Figure 1 demonstrates the bridge part connection to each end of the pair of shafts A and B; See annotated Figure 1) and in which the strain detection pattern (11 and 13) is attached on at least the part of the at least one shaft part of the pair of shaft parts (A; See annotated Figure 1).
Sonoki teaches a detection device (2; Figure 1a-1c), comprising a processor (13; Figure 2) configured to execute operations comprising:
generating a first observation image by imaging a pattern region ([0009, 0030]) and generate a second observation image by imaging the pattern region ([0009, 0030]) after the first observation image is generated ([0009, 0030]).
In claim 6, the specific limitations of "generate a second observation image by imaging the pattern region after the first observation image is generated and fastening of the at least one shaft part by a nut is adjusted; detecting a strain of the pattern region on the basis of the first observation image and the second observation image; and outputting fastening information related to fastening of the shaft part by the nut on the basis of the strain" in combination with the remaining limitations as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Claims 7 and 17-20 are also allowed for depending on claim 6.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY W MEGNA FUENTES whose telephone number is (571)272-6456. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8AM-4PM.
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, Laura Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
/ANTHONY W MEGNA FUENTES/ Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/LAURA MARTIN/ SPE, Art Unit 2855