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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 1/16/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-4 remain pending in the present application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112a/b rejections as well as the claim objections set forth previously. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have not overcome the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection set forth previously.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed towards an abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 1 recites, “the NC program generating unit for calculating a movement position on the linear axis corresponding to the instructed position and a rotational position about the rotation axis corresponding to the instructed angle on a basis of the acquired CL data to generate the NC program,” and “the NC program generating unit counts number of inversions of the rotational position for each of the first instructed point data and the second instructed point data, thereby suppressing an increase in a machining time and deterioration in a machined surface quality”, which analyzed under Step 2A Prong One, includes limitation of calculations which fall within the “Mathematical Concepts” grouping of abstract ideas and further includes limitations of counting inversions which is an act that can reasonably done using the human mind and thus falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. For instance, claim one includes the additional limitations of, “wherein the NC program generating unit generates (i) first instructed point data calculated with an initial value of the rotational position and (ii) second instructed point data, which is different from the first instructed point data, calculated with the initial value of the rotational position” and “generates the NC program in which the number of inversions is smaller.”, which analyzed under Step 2A Prong Two, includes limitations of generating data based on the calculations which just merely applies the use of the judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). Further, the limitation of, “a CL data acquiring unit for acquiring CL data including an instructed position of a tool leading end point and an instructed angle of a tool posture;”, which analyzed under Step 2A Prong Two, adds insignificant extra solution activity in the form of mere data gathering (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Finally, the limitations of, “An information processing device”, “CL data acquiring unit”, “an NC program generating unit”, “a processor”, and “a memory”, as generally recited merely represent generic computer components for implementing that abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because as analyzed under Step 2B, the additional elements merely amount to gathering CL data and sending the data over a network. Analyzed under Berkheimer, the act of gathering and sending data over a network has been deemed as well-understood, routine, and conventional by the courts (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “sending/receiving data over a network”).
Claim 4 is substantially similar to claim 1 and is thus rejected using the same rationale as provided above.
Regarding dependent claim 2, the claim includes additional limitations of performing counting of the number of inversions, which analyzed under Step 2A Prong One, adds limitations which can reasonably be performed in the human mind and thus fall within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The claim also includes additional details regarding details regarding rotation axis, which analyzed under Step 2A Prong Two, just generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Regarding claim 3, the claim includes limitations of making a selection, which analyzed under Step 2A Prong One, is an act that can reasonably be performed in the human mind and thus falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Further, the claim includes limitations regarding the generation of an NC program, which analyzed under Step 2A Prong Two, includes limitations of generating data based on the calculations which just merely applies the use of the judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The office would first like to state that there are 35 U.S.C. 101 and 112a/b rejections that must be overcome prior to consideration of allowance.
That being said, the independent claims recite: “An information processing device that generates an NC program to be used in a machine tool having a linear axis and a rotation axis, the device comprising:
a CL data acquiring unit for acquiring CL data including an instructed position of a tool leading end point and an instructed angle of a tool posture; and
an NC program generating unit for calculating a movement position on the linear axis corresponding to the instructed position and a rotational position about the rotation axis corresponding to the instructed angle on a basis of the acquired CL data to generate the NC program, wherein the NC program generating unit generates (i) first instructed point data calculated with an initial value of the rotational position and (ii) second instructed point data, which is different from the first instructed point data, calculated with the initial value of the rotational position, and
the NC program generating unit counts number of inversions of the rotational position for each of the first instructed point data and the second instructed point data and generates the NC program in which the number of inversions is smaller.”
The present invention seeks to improve NC controller operations, and in particular tracking the number of inversions being performed by the NC tool. The applicant has found that the frequency of inversion movements during a machining process has led to many problems such as deteriorations in the machined surface quality. As such, in order to solve the present problem, the applicant has presented a solution in which multiple NC programs are analyzed to count the amount of inversions that occur during each respective control program. The system will then select the program that presents the least amount of inversions during the control operation. This helps reduce amount of deterioration that occurs during machining operations.
The closest prior art of record is Tsuda et al. (US PGPUB 20190271965). Tsuda discloses a system and method for tracking the polarity of directions/movements of a numerical controller during machining operations. The system is capable of determining/tracking the types of axis rotation information that is performed during a given control program and is capable of selecting which types of rotations they desire for certain aspects which can reduce the amount of rotation in certain directions. However, Tsuda does not track the amount of inversions in a given program and chooses a program that minimizes the overall amount of inversions that occur during a machining operation, thus leaving the invention of Tsuda vulnerable to the surface wear as described in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-7, filed 1/16/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112a/b rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112a/b rejections of claims 1-4 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 1/16/2026 regarding the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In particular, the applicant added the limitation of, “…thereby suppressing an increase in a machining time and deterioration in a machined surface quality.”, arguing that the present limitation discloses an improvement to a particular technological environment. However, merely making a declaratory statement as to the intended effect of the present application without actually utilizing the proposed novel concept to achieve the desired results does not amount to significantly more (see MPEP 2106.04(d)(1)).
In order to correct the current issue, the office recommends amending the present claims to utilize the generated NC program resulting in less inversions to machine an object, thereby suppressing the increase in machining time/decreased surface quality.
For instance, the specification provides support for such limitations in paragraph [0021] of the filed specification, “The numerical controller transmits control signals to the machining equipment in accordance with an NC program…generated. The machining equipment drives the spindle and the table to machine the workpiece in accordance with instructions from the numerical controller.”
Incorporating the above limitations demonstrates the machine using the generated NC program to perform a machining operation, thus actually achieving the results of suppressing machining time and surface quality issues, and thus demonstrates significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
If applicant has further questions regarding amending the claims, feel free to reach out for assistance via an interview.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Basmaci et al. (US PGPUB 20230305540): disclose a system and method for determining cost factors in a NC manufacturing machine wherein the system counts the number of times a step impacts the cost of a control operation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER W CARTER whose telephone number is (469)295-9262. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6:30.
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, Robert Fennema can be reached at (571) 272-2748. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER W CARTER/Examiner, Art Unit 2117