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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 8, 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 and a2 as being anticipated by Chen (PGPub 2017/0043408).
Re Claim 1, Chen discloses an attachment connector member (Fig. 8, holding segment 10 assembled together with the central screw), for the connection of operating parts of a machine tool, including a cylindric central body (flange 20), a first engaging portion (connection protrusion 30) and a second engaging portion (portion of the holding element and the central screw on the right-hand side of the flange 20 on figure 8) branching off from opposite bands of the cylindric central body; characterized in that
said second engaging portion includes a first portion (side surface 102) exhibiting a trigonal (figure 4) truncated cone (figure 3) configuration and a second portion (head of the central screw on figure 8) with a cylindric configuration (figure 8), wherein the second portion of the second engaging portion branches off from the first portion of the second engaging portion (figure 8, see also the interpretation of the figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
286
398
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 2, Chen discloses the said first portion [being capable of being engaged in a base of a mandrel being part of the said machine tool]; the said second portion [being capable of being engaged in a tool body being part of the said machine tool] (Fig. 8).
The recitation in brackets [ ] is considered functional language. The reference discloses all the structural components of the member, which read on those of the instant invention. Therefore, the device is capable of performing the same desired functions as the instant invention as claimed.
Re Claim 3, Chen discloses the said first portion being further provided with a hollow central hole (Fig. 8).
Re Claims 5, 8, 10-12, see Fig. 3-4, 8.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 6-7, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Haimer (DE 102013100374 A1).
35. Re Claim 6, as best understood, Chen does not disclose the said first engaging portion exhibiting a substantially truncated cone configuration; the said body being further provided with at least a dihedral notch, with two recesses with a rectangular section and with opposed concavities, and with a cylindric peripheral recess. However, Haimer teaches first engaging portion 1 exhibiting a substantially truncated cone configuration (left or right side of component 1; Fig. 1); the said body being further provided with at least a dihedral notch 6, with two recesses with a rectangular section and with opposed concavities, and with a cylindric peripheral recess (Fig. 1-5). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize this configuration, as taught by Haimer, for the purpose of allowing easier gripping of the component and also since such structure is well known in the art and also since it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the component of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
36. Re Claim 7, Chen does not disclose the said first engaging portion exhibiting a substantially truncated cone configuration being provided with an end notch; the said body being further provided with at least a notch, with a rounded recess and with a cylindric peripheral recess. However, Haimer teaches first engaging portion 1 exhibiting a substantially truncated cone configuration being provided with an end notch; the said body being further provided with at least a notch (left side of component 1; Fig. 1), with a rounded recess and with a cylindric peripheral recess (Fig. 1-5). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize this configuration, as taught by Haimer, for the purpose of allowing easier gripping of the component and also since such structure is well known in the art and also since it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the component of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
37. Re Claim 9, Chen does not disclose the said body being further provided with a cylindric peripheral surface provided with a recess. However, Haimer teaches a body being further provided with a cylindric peripheral surface 5 provided with a recess 6 (Fig. 1-7). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a cylindric peripheral surface provided with a recess, as taught by Haimer, for the purpose of allowing easier gripping of the component and also since such structure is well known in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-12 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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 RYAN J WALTERS whose telephone number is (571)270-5429. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm EST.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/Ryan J. Walters/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights