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 § 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.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation(s) at Lines 2-3 set forth “a plurality of at least one of concave parts and convex parts”. The newly-added limitation at Lines 17-18 recites “the concave-convex profile of the plurality of parts”. It is unclear whether this limitation attempts to further limit the initial recitation of concave and/or convex parts into requiring both concave and convex parts, or not. For purposes of examination, the previously set-forth ‘at least one of concave parts and convex parts’ is interpreted as the structure claimed, and the ‘concave-convex profile’ is interpreted to mean ‘concave and/or convex profile’. Appropriate correction/clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xing et al. (CN 110181078, hereinafter ‘Xing’) in view of Ni et al. (US 20130065081, hereinafter ‘Ni’) and Bjormander et al. (US 20150231703, hereinafter ‘Bjormander’).
Regarding claims 1-2, Xing discloses a tool comprising a tool body 1 wherein a plurality of at least one of concave parts 5 and convex parts 6 are formed on at least one tool surface of the tool body, and the plurality of the parts are arranged at intervals along at least one direction on the at least one tool surface. A composite film layer 2/3/4 is disposed on the at least one tool surface (conforming to at least the convex parts, see e.g. Fig. 1). Xing does not explicitly disclose the coating(s) as claimed.
Ni discloses a similar cutting tool, wherein the tool body is provided with a composite film layer deposited on the surface of a tool (Fig. 3). The composite film layer comprises a metal film layer 138 formed on the tool surface, wherein the material of the metal film layer comprises metal (titanium nitride). A transition layer 140 is disposed on one side of the metal film layer away from the tool surface, wherein the transition film layer comprises a first film layer 146A formed on the metal film layer and a second film layer 148A formed on the first layer. A material of the first film layer comprises a nitride of the metal and a material of the second film layer comprises a nitride of an alloy of the metal and aluminum (Paragraphs [0029 & 0025]). A functional film layer 142 is disposed on one side of the transition film layer away from the tool surface, and a material of the functional film layer comprises a nitride of an alloy of the metal, aluminum and silicon (Paragraph [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of Xing by using the coating layers taught by Ni, in order to fully coat (including over the plurality of the parts) the tool in a wear-resistant material that would withstand harsh machining operations. Additionally, while not explicitly disclosed, Examiner takes Official Notice that a gear slicing tool lies fully within the scope of the types of tools outlined as suitable for use with the coating described in Paragraph [0003] of Ni. As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to construct the tool of Xing in view of Ni as a gear slicing tool in order to provide a durable long-lasting tool capable of machining gear workpieces if desired. As Xing does not disclose a coating, and the only exemplary embodiments of Ni illustrate a flat tool surface(s) (while nothing in Ni precludes providing the coating on a textured surface), neither Xing nor Ni explicitly disclose the composite film layer having an outer surface conforming to the concave-convex profile of the plurality of parts.
Bjormander discloses a similar cutting tool 1 having a concave-convex profile and a conformal coating 2 provided thereon (e.g. Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the coating of Ni to the tool of Xing in a conformal manner, following the concave-convex profile of the plurality of parts as taught by Bjormander in order to achieve a tool having higher wear resistance as compared to a flat tool surface (Bjormander, Paragraph [0009]).
Regarding claim 3, as modified above, the tool of claim 1, utilizing the coating of Ni, discloses a thickness of the metal film layer being 0.2-0.3 µm (Paragraph [0022]), a thickness of the transition film layer ranging between 0.5 and 0.8 µm (Paragraphs [0024-0025 & 0027]) and a thickness of the functional film layer is 1-3 µm (Paragraph [0030]).
Regarding claim 4, Xing discloses the at least one tool surface comprising a front tool surface, the plurality of the parts comprising a plurality of circular concave portions, a plurality of transverse grooves, a plurality of fan-shaped grooves or a plurality of crescent-shaped concave portions (Third complete Paragraph in the English translation of this document, provided by Applicant on 02/10/2025), these features being formed on the front tool surface.
Regarding claim 5, Xing discloses the plurality of parts comprising a plurality of circular concave portions and a plurality of transverse grooves (i.e. a combination of the circular hole-shaped and the mesh-shaped grooves outlined in the Third complete Paragraph in the English translation of this document, provided by Applicant on 02/10/2025). While not explicitly disclosed, Examiner takes Official Notice that gear slicing/machining tools are known in the art to have a tool front and rear surface that both experience cutting operations. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of claim 1 to provide the plurality of parts on both the front and rear tool surfaces to provide the benefits of the reduced friction surface and wear resistance taught by Xing to both cutting surfaces.
Regarding claim 6, the configuration of the plurality of parts claimed (transverse grooves extending along a first direction, spaced apart along a second direction, with a plurality of rows of circular concave portions arranged at intervals, said concave portions being at least partially located in the corresponding transverse grooves) is a configuration that is obvious to try, based upon the disclosure of Xing, which discloses a combination of circular hole and groove shapes, see also MPEP 2143, E.
Regarding claim 7, Xing discloses the plurality of parts comprising a plurality of circular concave portions and a plurality of crescent-shaped concave portions (i.e. a combination of the circular hole-shaped and the grooves outlined in the Third complete Paragraph in the English translation of this document, provided by Applicant on 02/10/2025). While not explicitly disclosed, Examiner takes Official Notice that gear slicing/machining tools are known in the art to have a tool front and rear surface that both experience cutting operations. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of claim 1 to provide the plurality of parts on both the front and rear tool surfaces to provide the benefits of the reduced friction surface and wear resistance taught by Xing to both cutting surfaces.
Regarding claim 8, the configuration of the plurality of parts claimed (an alternating arrangement of circular and concave grooves disposed in an array) is a configuration that is obvious to try, based upon the disclosure of Xing, which discloses a combination of circular hole and groove shapes, see also MPEP 2143, E.
Regarding claim 9, Xing discloses the plurality of parts comprising a plurality of circular convex portions (i.e. the cylindrically-shaped bumps outlined in the Third complete Paragraph in the English translation of this document, provided by Applicant on 02/10/2025). While not explicitly disclosed, Examiner takes Official Notice that gear slicing/machining tools are known in the art to have a tool front and rear surface that both experience cutting operations. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of claim 1 to provide the plurality of parts on both the front and rear tool surfaces to provide the benefits of the reduced friction surface and wear resistance taught by Xing to both cutting surfaces.
Regarding claim 10, Xing also discloses that the plurality of parts contains a combination of circular concave portions with the circular convex portions (Fig. 1 and the paragraph cited above). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of claim 9 to provide the plurality of parts on both the front and rear tool surfaces to provide the benefits of the reduced friction surface and wear resistance taught by Xing to both cutting surfaces.
Regarding claim 11, the configuration of the plurality of parts claimed (an alternating arrangement of circular convex and concave portions disposed in an array) is a configuration that is obvious to try, based upon the disclosure of Xing, which discloses a combination of circular hole and bump shapes, see also MPEP 2143, E.
Regarding claim 12, Xing discloses the circular concave portion(s) having a diameter of 30-50 µm, a depth of 10-150 µm and a distance between adjacent portions of 40-100 µm (e.g. the First complete Paragraph on Page 3 of the English translation provided by Applicant).
Regarding claim 13, Xing discloses the circular convex portion(s) having a diameter of 30-50 µm, a height of 10-150 µm and a distance between adjacent portions of 40-100 µm (e.g. the First complete Paragraph on Page 3 of the English translation provided by Applicant).
Regarding claims 14-16, Xing discloses exemplary dimensions of the circular hole and bump structures only (e.g. the First and Sixth complete Paragraphs on Page 3 of the English translation provided by Applicant). However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the transverse, fan-shaped and crescent-shaped grooves/concave portion(s) with a width/diameter of 40-100 µm, depth of 10-150 µm and distance therebetween of 40-100 µm, as taught by Xing in the exemplary dimensions cited above. Additionally, providing a fan-shaped included angle of 40˚-60˚ and an angle of a bottom sharp corner of the crescent-shaped concave portion(s) of 20˚-30˚ would have been obvious to try, as a fan-shape and crescent-shape inherently have a respective included angle/angle of a bottom sharp corner. See MPEP 2143, E as well as 2144.04, IV, A and B.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 Alan Snyder whose telephone number is (571)272-4603. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 7:00a - 5:00p.
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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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.
/Alan Snyder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722
Prosecution Insights