DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6,8-10 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Turanjanin (10,898,937). Regarding claims 1 and 18, Turanjanin discloses a roll forming method and apparatus (Fig. 7) for roll forming material (4) that moves along a longitudinal axis between rollers (8,9,10) from left to right along the x-axis (Fig. 7). Turanjanin discloses a first three dimensional sensor (1) to generate first data (position data, col. 7, lines 7-10) of a material (4) as the material (4) moves through a roll-forming apparatus (Fig. 7), the first data corresponding to measurements (position of the material including points in all three axes; col. 6, lines 34-40) of the material at a first longitudinal position (left side of machine housing 3; Fig. 7) of the roll forming apparatus and a second sensor (2) to generate second data (position data, col. 7, lines 7-10) wherein a workpiece position is determinable during the roll forming process, the second data corresponding to measurements (position of the material including points in all three axes; col. 6, lines 34-40) of the material at a second longitudinal position (right side of machine housing 3, Fig. 7) of the roll forming apparatus different from the first longitudinal position. Turanjanin discloses machine readable input (predetermined parameter input, col. 6, lines 56-57) and at least one processor circuit (computer 7 and programmable logic controller 28) which is programmed by the machine readable instructions to generate a 3D representation (three dimensional view; col. 6, lines 24-26) from 3D camera output of the material (4) based on the first and second data (position and elongation) and causing a machine learning model (comparison between current and desired model; col. 6, lines 49-50) to be trained and the computer (7) calculates and corrects the bending process 303; col. 6, lines 53-55) based on the 3D representation. The first and second data is output (col. 6, lines 46-48) from the first (1) and second (2) sensors which is provided as input (current measured state, col. 6, lines 48-49) to the machine learning model for prediction (col. 6, lines 58-65), the machine learning model provides predicted output for tool setup and control (col. 8, lines 5-56 and col. 10, lines 46-55) and the roll-forming process and control is adjusted (col. 6, lines 41-46 and col. 7, lines 30-32) for roll-forming the material.
Regarding claim 2, both of the first sensor (1) and second sensor (2) are configured to provide 3D representations to the computer control (7,28) which is configured to generate a second 3D representation (col. 6, lines 34-40) comprising necessary distances of observed objects in all three axes.
Regarding claim 3, Turanjanin discloses comparison (col. 6, lines 49-50 and col. 8, lines 64-66).
Regarding claims 4 and 20, a condition and defect (incorrect bending; col. 6, lines 44-46 and slip (col. 7, lines 58-62) is determined
Regarding claim 5, multiple production sessions are processed with comparison between sessions (col. 9, lines 38-45).
Regarding claim 6, the roll forming apparatus is adjusted from flatness (straightness) along the x-axis to non-flat comprising a bent condition with tool movement along the y-axis and Turanjanin detects bend angle (col. 8, lines 47-50) which is a deviation from a flat longitudinal condition (Fig. 1) to the bent non-flat configuration (Fig 2).
Regarding claim 8, Turanjanin outputs data in point cloud data (col. 6, lines 34-40) which comprising points in all three axes to model the material.
Regarding claim 9, Turanjanin discloses bending of the material (col. 8, lines 45-46).
Regarding claim 10, cross-sectional profiles (col. 8, lines 61-66) of the material are detected by the first 3D sensor (1) and the second 3D sensor (2) at the first sensor position (24) and the second sensor position (23) which are different positions.
Regarding claim 19, a flare is determined since the sensors (1,2) are constructed to measure a bending angle of the material (col. 8, lines 61-66). Claim 18 does not have any bending or material deforming steps claimed to deform and bend the material in any shape or configuration so it is not possible to determine what a “flare” would be in relation to any material structure and the Examiner reads flare as a bend in the material.
Claim(s) 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Turanjanin (10,898,937). Turanjanin discloses a computer (7) and a computer readable medium comprising digital storage for roll forming parameters (col. 6, lines 56-57) which are input by a terminal (13). Turanjanin discloses machine readable (predetermined parameter input, col. 6, lines 56-57) and at least one processor circuit (computer 7 and programmable logic controller 28) is programmed by the machine readable instructions to generate a 3D representation (three dimensional view; col. 6, lines 24-26) from 3D camera output of the material (4) based on the first and second data (position and elongation) and causing a machine learning model (comparison between current and desired model; col. 6, lines 49-50) to be trained (computer 7 corrects the bending process 303; col. 6, lines 53-55) based on the 3D representation. The first and second data is output (col. 6, lines 46-48) from the first (1) and second (2) sensors which is provided as input (current measured state, col. 6, lines 48-49) to the machine learning model for prediction (col. 6, lines 58-65), the machine learning model provides predicted output for tool setup and control (col. 10, lines 46-55) of the roll-forming process and control is adjusted (col. 6, lines 41-46 and col. 7, lines 30-32) for the roll-forming process based on the predicted output.
Regarding claim 12, both of the first sensor (1) and second sensor (2) circuitry are configured to provide instructions including 3D representations to the computer control (7,28) which is configured to generate a second 3D representation (col. 6, lines 34-40) comprising necessary distances of observed objects in all three axes.
Regarding claim 13, Turanjanin discloses comparison (col. 6, lines 49-50 and col. 8, lines 64-66) to calculate an adjustment between current and desired bending.
Regarding claim 14, a condition and defect (incorrect bending; col. 6, lines 44-46 and slip (col. 7, lines 58-62) is determined.
Regarding claim 15, a flare is determinable since the sensors (1,2) are constructed to measure a bending angle of the material (col. 8, lines 61-66) and the bending process is ended when the predetermined flare (bending) angle is reached.
Regarding claim 16, the computer readable instructions are tool positions for initially positioning the material flat in the bender (Fig. 1) and with the detection of bend angle (col. 8, lines 47-50), which is a deviation from a flat straight longitudinal condition to a bent configuration, the computer is configured sense and record the bending angle.
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) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turanjanin (10,898,937) in view of Sugai et al. (2021/0291254). Turanjanin does not disclose determining a material twist. Sugai teaches simulation modeling [0055] of a material that is being roll formed in a roll former (10; Fig. 1) and that the twist of the material is sensed by a detecting device and a control unit. It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to detect a material twist as taught by Sugai in the roll forming of Turanjanin so as to acquire data about the straightness of the material as it passes through the roll former since the sensors of Turanjanin are configured to sense object position including angular position.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turanjanin (10,898,937) in view of Sugai et al. (2021/0291254). Turanjanin does not disclose determining a material twist. Sugai teaches simulation modeling [0055] of a material that is being roll formed in a roll former (10; Fig. 1) and that the twist of the material is sensed by a detecting device and a control unit. It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to detect a material twist as taught by Sugai in the roll forming of Turanjanin so as to acquire data about the straightness of the material as it passes through the roll former since the sensors of Turanjanin are configured to sense object position including angular position.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD THOMAS TOLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5.
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, Chris Templeton can be reached at 571-270-1477. 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.
/EDWARD T TOLAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725