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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Matsumoto et al. (JP 2002351519).
Regarding claim 1,
Matsumoto discloses (Fig. 1):
A numerical controller (Fig. 1, all elements) comprising: a processor including (12): a region information reception unit (103) configured to receive input of data (from 101, region designation unit) defining a control region (¶0019) in which a control condition (i.e. movement route of the machine) is set in a movement region of an axis of a machine tool (¶0019); a region setting unit (109)configured to set the control region based on the data received by the region information reception unit (from 103, ¶0025); a control condition reception unit (113: boundary route generation unit for generating boundary route) configured to receive input of a control condition to be set in the control condition (setting boundary for movement route of the machine); a control condition setting unit (111) configured to set the control condition input at the control condition reception unit applied in the control region (¶0028); and a command generation unit configured to generate a control command in the control region based on the control condition (¶0035), wherein the processor controls the axis of the machine tool in accordance with the control command generated based on the control condition (¶0035).
Regarding claim 2,
Matsumoto discloses (Fig. 1):
further comprising: a path specification unit (Fig. 1, 107)configured to analyze a machining program (from 103, 104), and specify a movement path of the axis included in the control region (¶0024); and a block specification unit configured to specify a command block for commanding the movement path specified by the path specification unit from blocks of a machining program (116, ¶0033), wherein the command generation unit (118) generates the control command on the movement path commanded by the command block based on the control condition (¶0035).
Regarding claim 3,
Matsumoto discloses (Fig. 1):
further comprising: a block division unit (117) configured to divide the movement path straddling an outside and an inside of the control region into an outside path not included in the control region and an inside path included in the control region (¶0033-¶0035), wherein the command generation unit (118) generates the control command on the inside path based on the control condition (¶0033-¶0035).
Regarding claim 4,
Matsumoto discloses (Fig. 1):
wherein the control condition includes at least one of a machining condition, a speed control parameter, a servo parameter, a control parameter defined for each function, and a parameter indicating an ON/OFF state of a function (¶0035).
Regarding claim 5,
Matsumoto discloses (Fig. 1):
wherein the machining condition includes at least one of a speed of a spindle and a feed rate, the speed control parameter includes at least one of a permissible speed of the axis, permissible acceleration of the axis, permissible jerk of the axis, permissible tangential acceleration, and permissible normal acceleration, the servo parameter includes at least one of position loop gain and feedforward gain, the control parameter defined for each function includes at least a tolerance of a smoothing process, and ON/OFF of the function includes at least ON/OFF of oscillating motion (¶0030, ¶0035).
Regarding claim 6,
Matsumoto discloses (Fig. 1):
wherein the control condition setting unit sets a control mode in the control region to a control mode different from a control mode in a region other than the control region (¶0035-¶0036).
Regarding claim 7,
Matsumoto discloses (Fig. 1):
wherein the control condition setting unit switches the control mode based on a priority indicator (¶0030).
Regarding claim 8,
Matsumoto discloses (Fig. 1):
wherein the priority indicator includes at least an execution time (¶0035).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/18/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments pertaining to the 35 USC 101 rejection, applicant has overcome this rejection.
Regarding applicant’s arguments pertaining to the 35 USC 102 rejection for claims 1-8, applicant argues that Matsumoto does not teach “a control condition reception unit” which accepts machining conditions within the control area and executes those functions, however, this is taught in ¶0035 from Matsumoto.
As such, examiner is maintaining the rejections of claims 1-8.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES S LAUGHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7244. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060 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.
/C.S.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2837 /KAWING CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights