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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I and Invention A in the reply filed on 6 July 2026 is acknowledged. The Applicant in the response of 6 July 2026 has withdrawn claims 6-15 and 17-20, of which claim 17 is rejoined as discussed in the following paragraph.
Moreover, following a search of the elected Inventions I and A, the examiner has determined that there is no additional search and/or examination burden to further examining Invention II, encompassing claim 17. Therefore, the restriction requirement with respect to Invention II has been withdrawn, and claim 17 is rejoined for examination. The examiner reserves the right to re-instate the restriction requirement in the event that claim 17 is amended to introduce a search and/or examination burden. Further, in view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement as to the rejoined Invention II, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim directed to Invention II is presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the drawings include several incorrect reference characters. To provide two non-exhaustive examples, two of reference character “26” are provided in Fig. 3. One reference character “26” in Fig. 3 indicates an opening, and another reference character “26” in Fig. 3 indicates what appears to be the holder plate. The same reference character “26” should not be used for two different structures. Moreover, the holder plate should be indicated with reference character “22”, not reference character “26”. As another non-exhaustive example, the reference character “24” in Fig. 3 indicates a holder plate, rather than a support plate that is described with reference character “24” in the written description. Thus, Fig. 3 should be amended so that the holder plate is indicated with reference character “22” and such that the support plate is indicated with reference character “24”. The Applicant should review the specification and drawings to ensure that all reference characters indicate structures corresponding to the use of the reference characters in the specification.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(a)(1) because not all figures are black and white line drawings. All grayscale renderings, including Figs. 4A, 4B, 6, and 7, should be replaced with black and white line drawings.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q) because reference character ‘36’ in Fig. 5 does not include a lead line.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. While a trench ‘44’ is illustrated in the present drawings (see, e.g., Fig. 5), “a plurality of fastener locations” defined by the trench as required by claim 16 are not shown in the drawings. Therefore, the trench ‘44’ defining a plurality of fastener locations as required by claim 16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: First, “the outer periphery” of the workpiece at line 2 should read – an outer periphery – of the workpiece because the outer periphery of the workpiece is not introduced prior to this recitation. Second, the phrase “that enable” should be re-written to replace “that” with the name of the structure being described, such as by replacing “that enable” with – wherein the plurality of fastener locations enable –. Appropriate correction 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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE-20206427-U1 to Institut fur innovative Technologien (hereinafter ‘DE 427’ for brevity) in view of US Pub. No. 2021/0129368 A1 to Choi et al., as evidenced by US Pub. No. 2013/0048210 A1 to Parko.
Regarding claim 1, DE 427 discloses a fixture assembly for slitting a workpiece into a serpentine body (consistent with MPEP 2111.02(II), the body of claim 1 fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed fixture, and the recitation “for slitting a workpiece into a serpentine body” in the preamble merely states the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, such that the intended use slitting recitation in the preamble is not interpreted as a structural limitation of the claimed fixture; no slitting of the workpiece into a serpentine body is required by claim 1, especially in view of the claim being an apparatus claim), comprising:
a patterned support section 8 comprising a plurality of support slats interspaced with gaps (see the annotated Fig. 2 below); and
the workpiece to be positioned atop the pattern support section 8 (see the first paragraph of the English translation of DE 247) such that intended cutting locations in the workpiece are positioned directly above the gaps in the patterned support section 8 and the slats are positioned directly below uncut portions of the serpentine body after cutting the workpiece (this recitation is merely a manner of operating the claimed fixture; a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim (Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)) – e.g., the support section 8 of DE 427 is usable to perform cuts only by cutting directly above the gaps without cutting above the slats).
PNG
media_image1.png
712
977
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, DE 427 discloses that the patterned support section 8 is part of a support plate 3.
Regarding claim 17, DE 427 discloses a cutting system (shown in Fig. 1) comprising the fixture assembly substantially of claim 1 (see the discussion of the teachings of DE 427 with respect to claim 1 above, along with the modification of DE 427 below) positioned with respect to a water jet cutting tool 2 for enabling the water jet cutting tool 2 to slit the workpiece held by the fixture assembly (see Figs. 1 and 2 and the first two paragraphs of page 2 of the English translation of DE 427).
DE 427 fails to disclose any structure to hold a workpiece atop the patterned support section. As a result, DE 427 fails to disclose a holder plate comprising an opening configured to receive the workpiece and positioned atop the patterned support section as required by claim 1. DE 427 also fails to disclose that the support plate is positioned below the holder plate as required by claim 2, and that the support plate is secured to the holder plate via one or more fasteners as required by claim 3.
In general, Choi teaches a clamping structure 170 for holding a workpiece 10 while the workpiece 10 is being waterjet cut (see Fig. 9). Turning to claimed features, Choi teaches a holder plate 171 that comprises an opening 171a configured to receive the workpiece 10 (compare Figs. 2 and 3) and positioned atop a support section 110 (see Figs. 1 and 4). [Claim 1] Choi teaches that the support 110 is positioned below the holder plate 171. [Claim 2] Choi also teaches that the support 110 is secured to the holder plate 171 via one or more fasteners (see the bolts shown in Fig. 4 and described at paragraph 61). [Claim 3] Further, it is known in the art to advantageous in the field of waterjet cutting to clamp a workpiece during a waterjet cutting operation to ensure that the workpiece does not move as it is being cut (see Parko at paragraph 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the fixture assembly of DE 427 with a holder plate having an opening for receiving the workpiece, to position the holder plate atop the patterned support section of DE 427 such that the support plate of DE 427 is positioned below the holder plate, and to secure the holder plate to the support plate of DE 427 with one or more fasteners in view of the teachings of Choi. This modification is advantageous because DE 427 lacks any structure for preventing movement of the workpiece during waterjet cutting, and this modification provides DE 427 with a clamping device that clamps the workpiece during cutting to ensure that the workpiece does not move as it is being cut, which in turn ensures that the cutting operation is performed at one or more intended locations on the workpiece. Regarding holder plate being secured to the support plate of DE 427 with one or more fasteners, this feature is obvious due to the combined teachings of the references. To elaborate, the support plate of DE 427 is the structure that underlies and supports the holder plate following the modification of DE 427 above. Since Choi discloses securing the holder plate to an underlying support with one or more fasteners, the combination of references renders securing the holder plate to the support plate via the one or more fasteners obvious. Indeed, securing the holder plate to the support plate via the fasteners achieves the aim of ensuring that the workpiece does not move as it is being cut.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 427 as modified by Choi as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of US Pub. No. 2022/0305599 A1 to Dereims.
Regarding claim 4, DE 427, as modified, discloses that the support plate 3 comprises a receptacle shaped and sized to receive the patterned support section 8 therein (see Fig. 2 of DE 427, where the receptacle is the opening in the support plate 3 in which the support section 8 is positioned).
DE 427, as modified, fails to explicitly disclose that the support section is removable from the support plate. As such, DE 427, as modified, fails to disclose a removable support element on which the patterned support section is located and the receptacle of the support plate is shaped and sized to removably receive the removable support element therein as required by claim 4. DE 427, as modified, also fails to disclose that at least one outer edge of the removable support element has a lip that rests on a corresponding lip of a corresponding edge of the receptacle as required by claim 5.
Dereims, though, teaches a removable support element on which a patterned support section is located (see the annotated Fig. below; see also paragraph 43 disclosing the ‘removable’ feature and paragraphs 44 and 50 disclosing that the patterned support section is a metal grid through which water passes), and a receptacle of a support plate 20a is shaped and sized to removably receive the removable support element therein (see Fig. 2 and paragraph 43). [Claim 4] Dereims discloses that at least one outer edge of the removable support element has a lip (see the annotated Fig. below; the lip supports one of the handles of paragraph 43) that rests on a corresponding lip of a corresponding edge of the receptacle of the support plate 20a (see the annotated Fig. below; note that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a ‘lip’ includes the edge of a hollow vessel or cavity, and the lip of the removable support element rests on ‘a corresponding lip’ of the receptacle because the lip of the removable support element rests on an edge of a cavity of the support plate 20a; this interpretation is consistent with the present application because Fig. 5 of the present drawings also considers an edge of a cavity or opening as being a lip – as such, the lip of the receptacle of Dereims has the same structure as the lip of the receptacle as disclosed in Fig. 5 of the present drawings). [Claim 5] Dereims teaches that providing the patterned support section on a removable support element is advantageous because the patterned support section is removable to facilitate cleaning (see paragraph 43).
PNG
media_image2.png
739
1125
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the patterned support section of DE 427, as modified, on a removable support element that is removably received by the receptacle of the support plate by providing an outer edge of the removable support element with a lip that rests on a corresponding lip of the receptacle in view of the teachings of Dereims. This modification is advantageous to facilitate cleaning of the fixture assembly, such as if any residue builds up on the fixing assembly during operation. Further still, this modification is obvious because it makes the patterned support section separable from the support plate, and it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various separable elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. Indeed, making the patterned support section separable provides other advantages including the ability to use modular support sections depending on the nature of the cut being made (e.g., changing from a first support section having a first shape of apertures to a second support section having a second shape of apertures), and including the ability to easily replace the patterned support section if it becomes damaged during cutting.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 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, along with overcoming all objections set forth herein. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 16 requires that “the support plate comprises a trench defining a plurality of fastener locations about the outer periphery of the workpiece, that enable angular alignment of the holder plate to the support plate.” No known reference or combination of references teaches or suggests a trench defining a plurality of fastener locations, where the plurality of fastener locations of the trench enable angular alignment of the holder plate to the support plate. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a ‘trench’ includes a long cut in the ground or a long, narrow, usually steep-sided depression in the ocean floor. The Applicant uses the term ‘trench’ in a manner consistent with these definitions as is evident from Fig. 5. No known reference or combination of references teaches the plurality of fastener locations defined by a trench, such that claim 16 distinguishes over the best-known art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVAN H MACFARLANE whose telephone number is (303)297-4242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30AM to 4:00PM MT.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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.
/EVAN H MACFARLANE/Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights