DETAILED ACTION
Waterjet Cutting Machine System
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 05-22-2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined. Applicant’s amendment does overcome the specification objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office action mailed 01-22-2026. The previous rejection has been updated due to applicant’s amendments.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1,5,7-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orlandi (US20170259400A1) in view of Reukers (US20100173570A1) and Luce (US2290979A).
Regarding claim 1, Orlandi teaches a frame (see 8, figure 1) a first end (top of 8, figure 1) and a second end (bottom of 8, figure 1);
a cap (31, figure 2 ) on the first end of the frame, the cap including a liquid inlet port (20, figure 2) and an abrasive supply port (34, figure 2);
a pivoting assembly (para 0023-0026) disposed at the second end of the frame, the pivoting assembly including a nozzle (11, figure 1) that, the nozzle configured (abstract) to discharge high-pressure liquid and abrasive to perform a shape nozzle and taperless cutting operation;
a shaft assembly (para 0022) disposed within the frame, the shaft assembly including a motor (2, figure 1) and a shaft (para 0022, figure 1) , the shaft including an elongate bore (see annotated figure below) formed through a length of the shaft,
the elongate bore of the shaft in fluid communication (see figure 2; para 0044-0047) with both the liquid inlet of the cap and the nozzle of the pivoting assembly, the shaft assembly configured to rotate the pivoting assembly; and
a rotary bowl (30, figure 2) disposed atop the shaft of the shaft assembly and beneath the cap, the rotary bowl including an upper lip (see top of 17, figure 2; para 0044-0047 ), an inlet tube (para 0047, figure 2), an interior surface (17, figure 2), the inlet tube in fluid communication (para 0029 and 0047) with the liquid inlet port of the cap and configured to receive the high-pressure liquid from the liquid inlet port (para 0047), and
the interior surface (17, para 0027 and 0028) configured to receive the abrasive from the abrasive supply port, the interior surface (see 17, figure 2) including a top portion and a bottom portion (see figure 2), in the bottom portion of the interior surface of the rotary bowl, the rotary bowl defining an O-ring groove (see 33, para 0044) accommodating an O-ring for creating a seal with the cap.
PNG
media_image1.png
368
512
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Orlandi fails to teach a cap removably disposed and rotary bowl removably disposed.
Per MPEP 2144.04 (V-C), It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Orlandi to have a cap and a rotary bowl be removably disposed, since separating parts that were once integral involves only routine skill in the art. This modification would make it easier for an operator to perform maintenance on the cap and rotary bowl.
Orlandi does disclose rotating joint for the cutting head (para 0026), but fails to teach the pivoting assembly pivotable about a horizontal axis and vertical axis.
Reukers teaches a water jet cutting machine that pivotable about a horizontal axis and vertical axis. (para 0029)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Orlandi to have a water jet cutting machine that pivotable about a horizontal axis and vertical axis based on the teachings of Reukers. This modification would improve the cutting movements, and improve the cutting profiles. (see para 0029-0030 of Reukers)
Orlandi in view of Reukers fails to teach a liner within a rotary bowl disposed at bottom portion.
Luce teaches a sandblasting device that includes rotary bowl that has a liner (34, figure 3) manufactured from stainless steel (page 2) that is disposed at bottom portion rotary bowl (see figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Orlandi to include a liner within rotary bowl based on teachings of Luce. This modification would ensure that rotary bowl is protected and resistant to erosion. (see page 2 of Luce)
Regarding claim 5, modified Orlandi teaches wherein the shaft assembly is further configured to rotate the rotary bowl about the vertical axis. (see Reukers para 0029-0030;0062-0067 capable of performing this action)
Regarding claim 7, modified Orlandi teaches wherein the liner is manufactured from stainless steel. (see Luce page 2)
Regarding claim 8 modified Orlandi teaches wherein the liner (see Luce page 2; discloses 34 is located within the rotary bowl therefore the liner dimeter has to be less than diameter bottom of rotary bowl) includes a diameter less than a diameter of the bottom portion of the interior surface of the rotary bowl (see Orlandi interior 17, figure 2).
Regarding claim 9, modified Orlandi teaches wherein the liner (see Luce page 2; see Reukers para 0036,0064-0072)circumscribes the inlet tube of the rotary bowl (see Orlandi para 0047, figure 2), and the inlet tube extends through an entirety of the rotary bowl including outwardly and past the upper lip, the inlet tube in fluid communication with the liquid inlet port of the cap.
Regarding claim 10, modified Orlandi teaches wherein the top portion of the interior surface of the rotary bowl (see Orlandi interior 17, figure 2) includes a diameter larger than a diameter of the bottom portion of the interior surface of the rotary bowl (see Orlandi figure 2).
Regarding claim 11, modified Orlandi teaches wherein the rotary bowl further includes an abrasive aperture in the bottom portion of the interior surface of the rotary bowl, and the shaft includes an elongate groove formed along the length of the shaft, the abrasive aperture aligned with the elongate groove and permitting abrasive from the abrasive supply port to gravity feed from the rotary bowl through the abrasive aperture and into the elongate groove. (see Orlandi para 0051-0053, figures 1-2)
Regarding claim 12, modified Orlandi teaches wherein the abrasive supply port of the cap is oriented on an abrasive supply port axis (see Orlandi 34, figure 2), and the liquid inlet port of the cap (see Orlandi 20, figure 2) is oriented on a liquid supply port axis (see Orlandi figure 2), and the abrasive supply port axis is offset a first distance from the liquid supply port axis (see Orlandi distance between 34 and 20, figure 2), and the abrasive aperture of the rotary bowl is offset a second distance from the inlet tube of the rotary bowl (see figure 2 of Orlandi).
Claim(s) 2-4,6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orlandi (US20170259400A1) in view of Reukers (US20100173570A1) and Luce (US2290979A) as applied to claim 1 further in view of Hashish (US5320289A).
Regarding claim 2, modified Orlandi teaches all limitations stated above ,but fails to teach wherein the shaft further includes a plurality of standoff fasteners disposed on a top portion of the shaft.
Hashish teaches an abrasive water jet apparatus that includes a shaft (see figures 1-2) that has plurality of fasteners (see col 3 lines 15- col 4 lines 65) and rotary bowl that includes apertures receive fasteners that are screws (see col 3 lines 15- col 5 lines 65).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Orlandi to wherein the shaft further includes a plurality of standoff fasteners disposed on a top portion of the shaft based on the teachings of Hashish. This modification would ensure that the rotary bowl and shaft are aligned properly. (see col 3 lines 15- col 5 lines 65 of Hashish)
Regarding claim 3, modified Orlandi teaches herein the rotary bowl further includes a plurality of standoff apertures disposed on a bottom surface of the rotary bowl, and a plurality of set screw apertures disposed on a side surface of the rotary bowl, the plurality of standoff apertures in communication with the plurality of set screw apertures, the plurality of standoff apertures selectively receiving the plurality of standoff fasteners of the shaft. (see col 3 lines 15- col 5 lines 65 of Hashish)
Regarding claim 4, modified Orlandi teaches wherein the rotary bowl is selectively removably (see rejection above) coupled to the shaft with the standoff fasteners by a plurality of set screws disposed in the plurality of set screw apertures (see col 3 lines 15- col 5 lines 65 of Hashish).
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reukers (US20100173570A1) in view of Luce (US2290979A) as applied to claim 1 further in view of Hashish (US20190184523A1).
Regarding claim 6, modified Orlandi teaches all limitations stated above ,but fails wherein the rotary bowl is manufactured from aluminum.
Hashish teaches fluid jet cutting application that includes components manufactured from aluminum. (para 0078,0089).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Orlandi to have the rotary bowl is manufactured from aluminum based on teachings of Hashish. This modification would ensure that the rotary bowl has a protective cover. (see para 0078,0089)
Claim(s) 13-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reukers (US20100173570A1) in view of Bodin (US6049580A).
Regarding claim 13, Reukers teaches
A waterjet cutting machine (abstract), comprising:
a frame (34, figure 9a) including a first end and a second end;
a cap (A, figure 9a) disposed on the first end of the frame, the cap including a liquid inlet port (84, figure 9b) and an abrasive supply port (86, figure 9b);
a pivoting assembly (40, figure 11) disposed at the second end of the frame, the pivoting assembly including a nozzle (12, figure 11) that is pivotable about a horizontal axis (para 0067-0068), the nozzle configured to discharge high-pressure liquid and abrasive to perform a shape nozzle and taperless cutting operation; and
a shaft assembly (para 0062-0067) disposed within the frame, the shaft assembly including a motor (para 0064) and a shaft (para 0065-0067), the shaft including an elongate bore (figures 9a-10) formed through a length of the shaft, the elongate bore of the shaft in fluid communication with both the liquid inlet of the cap and the nozzle of the pivoting assembly (para 0065-0069), the shaft assembly configured to rotate the pivoting assembly about a vertical axis (para 0065-0071).
Reukers fails to teach including a nozzle that is pivotable about a horizontal axis between +/- 130 degrees relative to the horizontal axis.
Bodi teaches liquid jet cutting that has nozzle holder (24, figure 2) that can move about a horizonal axis through a half circle (see figure 2), help allow move nozzle (25, figure 2) into any orientation.
It is evident that Bodi and Reukers both recognize that the angle that the nozzle rotates relative to the horizonal axis is a result-effective variable since varying it affects the how much nozzle can move into any orientation and the different cutting profiles the apparatus can performed. Per MPEP 2144.05 II B only result-effective variables can be optimized . Therefore, it would have been obvious to optimize Reukers ‘s angle that the nozzle rotates relative to the horizonal axis based on the particular application and operational parameters, to render the claimed range obvious.
Regarding claim 14, modified Reukers teaches
wherein the pivoting assembly further includes a swing arm (see Reukers 55, 105, figure 11), an abrasive wire guard (see Reukers 107, figure 11a), and a mixing body (see Reukers para 0054 0057,0048) the swing arm configured to rotate about the vertical axis, the abrasive wire guard configured (capable of performing this action) to protect an electrical wiring configuration of the swing arm (see Reukers para 0031-0032), and the mixing body including a first end, a second end, and a side mix port (see Reukers para 0054,0057 0059), the first end of the mixing body in fluid communication with the elongate bore of the shaft, and the second end of the mixing body in fluid communication with the nozzle, and the side mix port configured (capable of performing this action) to receive the abrasive for mixing the abrasive with the high-pressure liquid within the mixing body and for delivery to the nozzle. (see Reukers para 0054-0072)
Regarding claim 15, modified Reukers teaches wherein the swing arm is rotatably coupled to the shaft assembly (see Reukers 55, 105, figure 11).
Regarding claim 16, modified Reukers teaches wherein the swing arm further includes a first planar end and a second planar end, the first planar end orthogonal to the second planar end, the first planar end of the swing arm coupled to the second end of the frame (see Reukers 55, 105, figure 11).
Regarding claim 17, modified Reukers teaches further configured (see Reukers capable of performing this action) to receive a rotation limit bar coupled to the second end of the swing arm, the rotation limit bar configured to limit the swing arm from pivoting more than +/- 72.5 degrees relative to the horizontal axis.
Regarding claim 18, modified Reukers teaches further including a motor (see Reukers para 0064) mounted to the swing arm (see 55, 105, figures 10 and 11)., the nozzle coupled to the motor, and the motor configured to pivot the nozzle about the horizontal axis (see Reukers para 0060-0071).
Regarding claim 19, modified Reukers teaches further including a tilt mount plate (see Reukers 39, figure 10), a tilt adjustment plate (see Reukers para 0062-0067; figures 9-11), and a cutting head mount (see Reukers 100, figure 10), the tilt mount plate coupled to the motor, the tilt adjustment plate coupled to the cutting head mount, and the cutting head mount coupled to the nozzle.
Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orlandi (US20170259400A1) in view of Reukers (US20100173570A1), Bodin (US6049580A), Luce (US2290979A).
Regarding claim 20, a frame (8, figure 1) including a first end (top of 8, figure 1) and a second end (bottom of 8, figure 1), a cap (31, figure 2) disposed on on the first end of the frame, the cap including a liquid inlet port (20, figure 2) and an abrasive supply port (34, figure 2); a pivoting assembly (para 0023-0026) disposed at the second end of the frame, the pivoting assembly including a nozzle (11, figure 1) the nozzle configured to discharge high
pressure liquid and abrasive to perform a shape nozzle and taperless cutting operation (abstract);
a shaft assembly (para 0022) disposed within the frame, the shaft assembly including a motor (2, figure 1) and a shaft (para 0022, figure 1), the shaft including an elongate bore (see annotated figure below) formed through a length of the shaft,
the elongate bore of the shaft in fluid communication (see figure 2; para 0044-0047) with both the liquid inlet of the cap and the nozzle of the pivoting assembly, the shaft assembly configured to rotate the pivoting assembly about a vertical axis; and
a rotary bowl (30, figure 2) disposed atop the shaft and beneath the cap, the rotary bowl including an upper lip (see top of 17, figure 2; para 0044-0047), an inlet tube (para 0047), an interior surface (17, figure 2), and the inlet tube in fluid communication (para 0029 and 0047) with the liquid inlet port (para 0047) of the cap and configured to receive the high-pressure liquid from the liquid inlet port, and the interior surface (17, para 0027 and 0028) configured to receive the abrasive from the abrasive supply port, the interior surface including a top portion and a bottom portion (see figure 2).
Orlandi fails to teach a cap removably disposed and rotary bowl removably disposed.
Per MPEP 2144.04 (V-C), It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Orlandi to have a cap and a rotary bowl be removably disposed, since separating parts that were once integral involves only routine skill in the art. This modification would make it easier for an operator to perform maintenance on the cap and rotary bowl.
Orlandi does disclose rotating joint for the cutting head (para 0026), but fails to teach the pivoting assembly pivotable about a horizontal axis and vertical axis.
Reukers teaches a water jet cutting machine that pivotable about a horizontal axis and vertical axis. (para 0029)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Orlandi to have a water jet cutting machine that pivotable about a horizontal axis and vertical axis based on the teachings of Reukers. This modification would improve the cutting movements, and improve the cutting profiles. (see para 0029-0030 of Reukers)
Orlandi in view of Reukers fails to teach that is pivotable about a horizontal axis between +/- 130 degrees relative to the horizontal axis
Bodi teaches liquid jet cutting that has nozzle holder (24, figure 2) that can move about a horizonal axis through a half circle (see figure 2), help allow move nozzle (25, figure 2) into any orientation.
It is evident that Bodi and Reukers both recognize that the angle that the nozzle rotates relative to the horizonal axis is a result-effective variable since varying it affects the how much nozzle can move into any orientation and the different cutting profiles the apparatus can performed. Per MPEP 2144.05 II B only result-effective variables can be optimized . Therefore, it would have been obvious to optimize Orlandi ‘s angle that the nozzle rotates relative to the horizonal axis based on the particular application and operational parameters, to render the claimed range obvious.
Orlandi in view of Reukers and Boldin fails to teach a liner within a rotary bowl disposed at bottom portion.
Luce teaches a sandblasting device that includes rotary bowl that has a liner (34, figure 3) manufactured from stainless steel (page 2) that is disposed at bottom portion rotary bowl (see figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Orlandi to include a liner within rotary bowl based on teachings of Luce. This modification would ensure that rotary bowl is protected and resistant to erosion. (see page 2 of Luce)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 05-22-2026 with respect to the
rejection(s) of claim(s) 1,13,20 and their dependent claims under 35 U.S.C.103 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection (as necessitated by amendment) relies on a different combination of prior art references, not applied in the prior rejection of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH AKYAA FORDJOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-0390. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:30am - 5:30pm and Friday 6:00am-3:00pm.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
/SARAH AKYAA FORDJOUR/ Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights