DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-13 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/28/23 and 04/1/25 were considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
4. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
5. Claims 1-5 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Otsuki (Otsuki), JP publication no. 2003889861.
As per claim 1, Otsuki discloses a control system comprising:
a memory configured to store a program configured to generate a command related to a working position, a controller configured to execute the program [para 1];
a first output unit configured to output a drive signal to a first drive portion;
a second output unit configured to output another drive signal to a second drive portion [para 54]; and
a measurement unit configured to measure a drive amount of the first drive portion [para 34-38], wherein
the controller is configured to perform: extracting a low-frequency component included in the command; transmitting the low-frequency component to the first output unit; correcting a high-frequency component included in the command based on a signal indicating the drive amount of the first drive portion; and transmitting the high-frequency component to the second drive portion [para 45, 54-55].
Otsuki teaches:
[0034] The angle of the fine movement mirror 21 is measured by a sensor 25 that receives the auxiliary laser beam 230 emitted from the auxiliary laser source 23 and reflected by the fine movement mirror 21.
[0038] The processing device control device 61 operates a scanner system, an XY table, a laser oscillator, and the like in accordance with a movement command given from the numerical control device 60. The scanner control device 62 inside the machining device control device 61 that has received the movement command drives the galvano scanners 31 and 32 via the drive circuits 311 and 321, and drives the fine movement mirrors 21 and 22 via the drive circuits 251 and 261. The position detectors provided in the galvano scanners 31 and 32 feedback the rotation angles of the mirrors 31a and 32a to the scanner control device 62 via the detection circuits 312 and 322. The sensors 25 and 26 feedback the angles of the micromotion mirrors 21 and 22 to the scanner control device 62 via the detection circuits 252 and 262.
[0054] It should be noted that the following can also be applied as a method of sharing the scanning amount for each of the micromotion mirror and the galvano scanner. That is, the movement command given from the numerical controller 60 is subjected to digital filter processing in the scanner controller 62, and is separated into a high-frequency component and a low-frequency component. The high-frequency component is given as a position command to the servo system of the fine-motion scanning unit, and the low-frequency component is given to the scanner servo system as a position command. The digital filter processing can also be performed by an analog filter using an analog arithmetic circuit. However, in the case of this method, it is necessary to monitor the amount of displacement of the high-frequency component and to correct the distribution when the amount of displacement exceeds the stroke of the fine-motion scanner.
As per claim 2, Otsuki discloses the first drive portion; and the second drive portion [figure 1; para 21-24, 26, 27].
As per claim 3, Otsuki discloses the correcting the high-frequency component included in the command includes: adding a position deviation of the first drive portion to the low-frequency component based on the signal; and subtracting the low-frequency component after adding processing from the command [para 54-55].
As per claim 4, Otsuki discloses the controller is further configured to adjust the position deviation by performing proportional-integral-differential (PID) control [figure 1; para 54-55]2.
As per claim 5, Otsuki discloses the controller is further configured to limit the position deviation [para 54-55].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
6. 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.
7. Claims 6-7 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otsuki (Otsuki), JP publication no. 200388986 in view of Abel et al. (Abel), US publication no. 2009/02842103.
As per claim 6, Otsuki fails to disclose the controller is further configured to change a separation proportion between the low-frequency component and the high frequency component based on the position deviation.
Abel discloses the controller is further configured to change a separation proportion between the low-frequency component and the high frequency
component based on the position deviation [para 21].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention to combine the teachings of Otsuki and Abel because they both disclose a control system, the specify teachings of Abel stated above would have further enhanced the performance and functionality of Otsuki system to obtain predictable results.
As per claim 7, Abel disclose the changing the separation proportion between the low-frequency component and the high-frequency component based on the position deviation includes: repeating the changing the separation proportion; comparing a plurality of position deviations each occurring at a corresponding one of a plurality of separation proportions; and selecting a separation proportion at which the position
deviation is the smallest [para 21].
As to claims 8-13, claims 1-7 basically are the corresponding elements that are carried out the method of operating step in claims 8-13. Accordingly, claims 8-13 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claims 1-7.
8. Examiner's note: Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. MPEP 2141.02 VI: “PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS."
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Uno, US publication no. 2019/0369603, discloses a numerical controller for controlling a machine tool for processing a workpiece by a tool attached to a spindle
based on a processing program, and performing PID control of a feed speed such that a spindle load becomes constant.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN CAO whose telephone number is (571)272-3664. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:00 am-3:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Lee can be reached on 571-272-3667. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Dec. 8, 2025
/CHUN CAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115
1 Otsuki is cited by applicant.
2 Adjust position deviation using PID control are well known in the prior art and the skilled person would use such control to carry out the control.
3 Abel is cited by applicant.