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 .
Status of the Application
2. Claim 1-11 have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits.
Drawings
3. The drawings filed on 8/22/23 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Specification
4. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Interpretation
5. 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.
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 conversion unit for converting coordinate systems, and a storage unit in claim 1, and 10-11;
an output unit for outputting a beam in claim 2;
a scanning unit for scanning a beam in claim 3;
a focusing unit for focusing a beam in claim 4;
a display unit for displaying and an input unit for inputting in claim 5;
an output unit for outputting a beam and input unit further inputs in claim 7.
The filed specification (PG Pub: 2024/0142938) disclose conversion unit for converting coordinate systems, and a storage unit (e.g., The machine controller 4 and the tool controller 5 each comprise a computer device (not illustrated) including a processor such as a CPU (central processing unit) for executing programs, RAM (random access memory), ROM (read-only memory) and other memories. Though the “units” described herein are constituted by, for example, program modules executed by a processor, they may be constituted by one or more semiconductor integrated circuits or other hardware which does not execute programs) (Para. [0036]),
an output unit (e.g., the output unit is, for example, a laser oscillator, Para. [0047]);
a scanning unit for scanning a beam (e.g., For example, the scanning unit 31b is a galvanometer scanner, comprises two scan mirrors for scanning the beam, Para. [0047])
a focusing unit for focusing a beam (e.g., in the focusing unit 31a, in the case of an electron beam, ion beam, microwave beam, or X-ray beam, the focusing lens is preferably an electron lens, in the case of an ultrasonic beam, the focusing lens is preferably an acoustic lens, and in the case of a water jet beam, a focus nozzle is preferably used in place of a focusing lens, Para. [0052]);
a display unit for displaying and an input unit for inputting (e.g., Though the display unit 70 and input unit 71 are composed of program modules executed by the processor, the display unit 70 may be, for example, a display device, and the input unit 71 may be, for example, a keyboard, Para. [0043]);
an output unit for outputting a beam (e.g., the output unit is, for example, a laser oscillator, Para. [0047]) and input unit further inputs (e.g., Though the display unit 70 and input unit 71 are composed of program modules executed by the processor, the display unit 70 may be, for example, a display device, and the input unit 71 may be, for example, a keyboard, Para. [0043]).
Hence the filed specification discloses a structure for each of the claimed units and functions that invoked 112f. Thus, the claimed limitations are supported by the specification and are in accordance with MPEP 2181(II)(B).
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 § 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.
Regarding claim 9, and 11, the phrase "an external device which can be connected to the controller" renders the claim indefinite because it introduces an optional, undefined, or overly broad alternative, and not clearly defining the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
If connecting an external device to the controller is optional then the control function cant be performed as claimed in claim 9, 11. The external device must connected to the controller in order to control the machine and tool as it includes conversion unit for converting coordinate systems.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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. Claim 1-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irie (US PG Pub: 2008/0161964) in view of Komatsu (Pub: 2007/0075055).
8. Regarding claim 1, Irie teaches a control system, comprising a machine and a tool which are driven and controlled using independent coordinate systems which are different from each other (e.g., In FIG. 1, a robot 1 has six joints. Each of them has a mechanism which is driven by servo motors, and a laser head 3 is fitted to a front end portion thereof) (robot 1 is a machine and laser head 3 is a tool) (Para. [0120]),
and a controller which controls at least one of the machine and the tool (e.g., A robot control device 2 is connected to the robot 1, a laser welding device 5, and the laser head 3, respectively) (Para. [0121]),
and a storage unit in which at least one of a specific position and posture not common between the machine and the tool is stored as information of a common coordinate system which is common between the machine and the tool (e.g., a manipulator file storage for storing the position of the control point of the robot and the focal position of the laser beam) (Para. [0035], Fig. 3).
Irie does not specifically teach the control system comprising: a conversion unit for converting coordinate systems.
Komatsu teaches the control system comprising: a conversion unit for converting coordinate systems (e.g., In the first embodiment, as previously described, the entire coordinate system of the laser processing head 3 is converted based on the current position of the laser processing head 3 (here, the term "position" includes the angle of the laser processing head 3) as determined based on the values obtained from the encoders of the robot axes. In this way, the inaccuracy of the position of the robot 1 is compensated for and the laser beam 100 is directed to the predetermined laser irradiation position) (Para. [0067], also refer to Para. [0068]).
Because Komatsu is also directed to a laser welding system, a laser welding method, and an emitting device (Para. [0003], it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Irie and Komatsu before him/her, to modify the a robot system which performs a laser processing teachings of Irie to include the coordinate conversion teaching of Komatsu in order to accurately positioning the laser beam onto a predetermined laser irradiation position even when the actual position and/or posture (angle) of a robot is different from the position and/or posture stipulated in a robot movement control command (Para. [0008]).
9. Regarding claim 2, the combination of Irie and Komatsu teaches the control system according to claim 1, wherein Irie further teaches the tool comprises an output unit for outputting a beam, and the specific position and posture is an irradiation position and irradiation posture of the beam (e.g., A laser oscillator is built in the laser welding device 5. A laser beam outputted from the laser oscillator is incident on the laser head 3 through the fiber 6. The laser head 3 includes a mirror 7 (see FIG. 2), and the incident laser beam is reflected on the mirror 7, whereby its direction is changed to be radiated to an object, thereby performing a welding) (Para. [0121]) .
10. Regarding claim 3, the combination of Irie and Komatsu teaches the control system according to claim 1 or 2, wherein Irie further teaches the tool comprises a scanning unit for scanning a beam, and the specific position and posture is an irradiation position and irradiation posture of the beam (e.g., The laser head 3 includes a mirror 7 (see FIG. 2), and the incident laser beam is reflected on the mirror 7, whereby its direction is changed to be radiated to an object, thereby performing a welding) (mirror 7 is a scanner) (Para. [0121]).
11. Regarding claim 4, the combination of Irie and Komatsu teaches the control system according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein Irie further teaches the tool comprises a focusing unit for focusing a beam, and the specific position and posture is a focal position and focal posture of the beam (e.g., In FIG. 2, the laser beam which is incident on the laser head 3 through the fiber 6 passes a lens in the laser head 3, and then it is concentrated. After the condensing, its direction is changed to the object by the mirror 7, and a focus is connected to a focal position W) (Para. [0123]).
12. Regarding claim 5, the combination of Irie and Komatsu teaches the control system according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein Irie further comprising at least one of a display unit for displaying at least one of the specific position and posture as information in the common coordinate system, and an input unit for inputting a movement command for at least one of the specific position and posture as information in the common coordinate system (e.g., FIG. 14. FIG. 14 is a diagram showing an example that a configuration with respect to the laser locus calculator 26 is performed. The configuration item shown here is displayed on the screen by the manipulator manipulating the pendant 4. The manipulator can record the result of a configuration or a change in the manipulator file storage 23) (Para. [0185], also refer to Para. [0144])).
13. Regarding claim 6, the combination of Irie and Komatsu teaches the control system according to claim 5, wherein Irie further comprising a teaching device which can be connected to the controller (e.g., In order to perform the laser welding as shown in FIG. 4 by the robot system according to the embodiment, the manipulator should move the robot 1 and the laser head 3 to the desired position in advance through the pendant 4 (shown in FIG. 1)) (Para. [0138]) , wherein the teaching device comprises at least one of the display unit and the input unit.
14. Regarding claim 7, the combination of Irie and Komatsu teaches the control system according to claim 5 or 6, wherein Irie further teaches the tool comprises an output unit for outputting a beam (e.g., he manipulator can display these laser-welding condition files on the display by manipulating the pendant 4) (Para. [0144]), and the input unit further inputs output conditions of the beam (e.g., Whenever the welding process is performed, the manipulator should select the operation program through the pendant 4 and instruct the operation start) (Para. [0139]) .
15. Regarding claim 8, the combination of Irie and Komatsu teaches the control system according to any one of claims 1 to 7, wherein Komatsu further teaches the controller comprises the conversion unit (e.g., Accordingly, the laser emission command value Sr(t) is a command value for moving the reflecting mirror 11 and the focusing lens 122 in order to compensate for the deviation of the actual position of the robot 1 from the commanded position. In other words, the laser emission command value Sr(t) is a revised command value that has been revised with respect to the position specified in the teaching data based on the actual position of the laser processing head 3. The laser emission command value Sr(t) is calculated using a coordinate conversion. The method of calculating the laser emission command value Sr(t) will now be explained.) (Para.[0055]).
16. Regarding claim 10, Claim 10 recites a controller that implement the control system of claim 1, with substantially the same limitations, respectively. Therefore the rejection applied to claim 1, also applies to claim 10 respectively.
17. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oe Yuki (Pub: 2012/0255938) in view of Komatsu (Pub: 2007/0075055).
18. Regarding claim 11, Oe teaches an external device which can be connected to a controller for controlling at least one of a machine and a tool which are driven and controlled using independent coordinate systems which are different from each other (e.g., While the PC is shown as an example of the external device in the present invention in the aforementioned embodiment, the present invention is not restricted to this. In the present invention, an external device (external information terminal) such as a portable telephone terminal or a personal digital assistance (PDA), for example, other than the PC may be employed. Furthermore, while the external device and the pendant (teaching apparatus) are provided separately from each other in the aforementioned embodiment, the present invention is not restricted to this, but both may be integrated. In other words, the function of the pendant (teaching apparatus) may be integrated in the PC or the like, which is an external device, and the PC may be connected to the robot control apparatus. Alternatively, the pendant may be formed to be capable of preparing the arbitrarily-shaped welding locus thereon) 9Para. [0083], Fig. 1-2),
and a storage unit in which at least one of a specific position and posture not common between the machine and the tool is stored as information of a common coordinate system which is common between the machine and the tool (e.g., Then, information regarding the arbitrarily-shaped welding locus prepared with the arbitrary shape preparation tool is stored as a file in the memory card 110 attached to the device slot 61a of the PC 6, in the PC 6, or in the USB memory (not shown) attached to the USB terminal 61b of the PC 6. Thus, the information regarding the arbitrarily-shaped welding locus is prepared with the PC 6.) (Para. [0035]).
Oe does not specifically teach the external device comprising: a conversion unit for converting coordinate systems.
Komatsu teaches the external device (e.g., Alternatively, it is acceptable for the numerical model simulator 55 to be arranged as an external device of the robot control unit 52. In such a case, the result of the simulation, i.e., virtual laser emission command value based on the estimated position of the laser processing head 3 obtained based on the teaching data, can be simply delivered to the robot control unit 52) (Para. [0103]-[0104, Fig. 10, element 55) comprising: a conversion unit for converting coordinate systems (e.g., In the first embodiment, as previously described, the entire coordinate system of the laser processing head 3 is converted based on the current position of the laser processing head 3 (here, the term "position" includes the angle of the laser processing head 3) as determined based on the values obtained from the encoders of the robot axes. In this way, the inaccuracy of the position of the robot 1 is compensated for and the laser beam 100 is directed to the predetermined laser irradiation position) (Para. [0067]).
Because Komatsu is also directed to a laser welding system, a laser welding method, and an emitting device (Para. [0003], it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Oe and Komatsu before him/her, to modify the robot system according to the embodiment of the present invention is a robot system for remote laser welding emitting a laser beam from a position spaced (Para. [0024] to include the coordinate converting teaching of Komatsu in order to accurately positioning the laser beam onto a predetermined laser irradiation position even when the actual position and/or posture (angle) of a robot is different from the position and/or posture stipulated in a robot movement control command (Para. [0008]).
18. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irie in view of Komatsu and further in view of Oe Yuki (Pub: 2012/0255938).
19. Regarding claim 9, the combination of Irie and Komatsu teaches the control system according to any one of claims 1 to 8, wherein Komatsu teaches wherein the external device (e.g., Alternatively, it is acceptable for the numerical model simulator 55 to be arranged as an external device of the robot control unit 52. In such a case, the result of the simulation, i.e., virtual laser emission command value based on the estimated position of the laser processing head 3 obtained based on the teaching data, can be simply delivered to the robot control unit 52) (Para. [0103]-[0104, Fig. 10, element 55) comprises the conversion unit (e.g., In the first embodiment, as previously described, the entire coordinate system of the laser processing head 3 is converted based on the current position of the laser processing head 3 (here, the term "position" includes the angle of the laser processing head 3) as determined based on the values obtained from the encoders of the robot axes. In this way, the inaccuracy of the position of the robot 1 is compensated for and the laser beam 100 is directed to the predetermined laser irradiation position) (Para. [0067]).
The combination of Irie and Komatsu does not specifically teach an external device which can be connected to the controller.
Oe comprising an external device which can be connected to the controller (e.g., Furthermore, while the external device and the pendant (teaching apparatus) are provided separately from each other in the aforementioned embodiment, the present invention is not restricted to this, but both may be integrated. In other words, the function of the pendant (teaching apparatus) may be integrated in the PC or the like, which is an external device, and the PC may be connected to the robot control apparatus) (Para. [0083], Fig. 1).
Because Oe is also directed to the robot system according to the embodiment of the present invention is a robot system for remote laser welding emitting a laser beam from a position spaced (Para. [0024]), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having combined teachings of Irie, Komatsu and Oe before him/her, to modify the a robot system which performs a laser processing teachings of Irie and coordinate converting teaching of Komatsu to include the external device connected to controller teaching of Oe in order to prepare arbitrarily-shaped welding locus (Para. [0068]).
Conclusion
Kawai (Pub: 2006/0157455) disclose a laser welding control device and its control method capable of substantially improving the laser welding process (Para. [0007]).
Fukawa (Pub: 2010/0174407) disclose a laser processing robot control system that facilitates a laser processing teaching operation (Para. [0003]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIGNESHKUMAR C PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-0698. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 AM - 5:00 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, Kenneth M. Lo can be reached at (571)272-9774. 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.
/JIGNESHKUMAR C PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116