DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 16 are objected to because of apparent antecedent errors. Going forward with examination, the claims are interpreted to be (Please also see the 112 rejections below):
--5. The processing device according to claim 2, wherein the processing device inspects the weld portion by using a diameter of the designated weld portion.--
--16. The inspection method according to claim 12, wherein in the inspecting, a diameter of the designated weld portion is calculated using the intensity data and the weld portion is inspected based on the diameter.--
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claims 1, 11 and 19 essentially recite a limitation “receive intensity data of a reflected wave obtained by transmitting an ultrasonic wave along a first direction toward a joined body; designate a weld portion of the joined body by using the intensity data; and calculate a first center position of the designated weld portion in a first plane crossing the first direction.” The limitation is judicial exception because it is not integrated into any practical application.
Furthermore, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as they can be practiced mentally and/or with aid of just a pen and paper. Although the claims further recite additional elements like a processing device, a program, etc., those elements represent nothing more than means to convey the abstract idea. Those elements may be broadly viewed as nothing more than an attempt to present the same abstract idea unpatentable (MPEP 2106.05(a)).
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are how the invention may be used.
In order to overcome both the 101 rejections and 112 rejection, claims 1-20 are interpreted to be:
--1. A processing device (10), configured to:
receive, via a detector (20) connected to the processing device (10), intensity data of a reflected wave obtained by transmitting an ultrasonic wave from the detector (20) along a first direction (Z) toward a joined body (50), the detector (20) configured to transmit the ultrasonic wave, detect the reflected wave, and transmit the intensity data to be received at the processing device (10);
designate a weld portion (53) of the joined body (50) by using the intensity data;
calculate a first center position (C1) of the designated weld portion (53) in a first plane (X-Y) crossing the first direction (Z);
calculate, in the first plane (X-Y), a distance (D) between the first center position (C1) of the designated weld portion (53) and a second center position (C2) of a predesigned weld portion tentatively to be completed for the joined body (50), wherein the predesigned weld portion is previously stored to be retrieved at the processing device (10); and
determine a goodness of the joined body (50) by using the calculated distance (D).
--4. The processing device according to claim [[2]] 1, wherein the processing device outputs a first notification to a user when a value based on the distance is greater than a first threshold.--
--5. The processing device according to claim [[2]] 1, wherein the processing device inspects the weld portion by using a diameter of the designated weld portion.--
6. The processing device according to claim 5, wherein the processing device determines an accuracy of the inspection of the weld portion by using the distance.
7. The processing device according to claim 6, wherein the processing device outputs a second notification to a user when a value based on the distance is greater than a second threshold.
9. The detecting system according to claim [[8]] 1, further comprising:
a manipulator,
the detector being located at a distal end of the manipulator.
10. The detecting system according to claim 9, further comprising:
a control device configured to control the manipulator,
the control device correcting a position of the detector by operating the manipulator to reduce a distance between the first center position and a second center position of the intensity data in the first plane when a value based on the distance is greater than a first threshold,
the detector transmitting the ultrasonic wave toward the weld portion and detecting the reflected wave at the corrected position.
11. A processing method, comprising:
receiving, via a detector (20) connected to a processing device (10), intensity data of a reflected wave obtained by transmitting an ultrasonic wave along a first direction toward a joined body (50), the detector (20) configured to transmit the ultrasonic wave, detect the reflected wave, and transmit the intensity data to be received at the processing device (10);
designating a weld portion (53) of the joined body (50) by using the intensity data;
calculating a first center position (C1) of the designated weld portion (53) in a first plane (X-Y) crossing the first direction;
calculating, in the first plane (X-Y), a distance (D) between the first center position (C1) of the designated weld portion (53) and a second center position (C2) of a predesigned weld portion tentatively to be completed for the joined body (50), wherein the predesigned weld portion is previously stored to be retrieved at the processing device (10); and
determining a goodness of the joined body (50) by using the calculated distance (D).--
12. An inspection method, comprising:
the processing method according to claim 11; and
inspecting the weld portion using the intensity data.
--15. The processing method according to claim [[13]] 11, further comprising:
outputting a first notification to a user when a value based on the distance is greater than a first threshold.--
16. The inspection method according to claim 12, wherein in the inspecting, a diameter of the designated weld portion is calculated using the intensity data and the weld portion is inspected based on the diameter.
17. The inspection method according to claim 16, further comprising:
determining an accuracy of the inspection of the weld portion by using the distance.
18. The inspection method according to claim 16, further comprising:
outputting a second notification to a user when a value based on the distance is greater than a second threshold.
--19. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program, the program configured to cause a processing device (10) to:
receive, via a detector (20) connected to the processing device (10), intensity data of a reflected wave obtained by transmitting an ultrasonic wave along a first direction toward a joined body (50), the detector (20) configured to transmit the ultrasonic wave, detect the reflected wave, and transmit the intensity data to be received at the processing device (10);
designate a weld portion (53) of the joined body (50) by using the intensity data;
calculate a first center position of the designated weld portion (53) in a first plane (X-Y) crossing the first direction;
calculate, in the first plane (X-Y), a distance (D) between the first center position (C1) of the designated weld portion (53) and a second center position (C2) of a predesigned weld portion tentatively to be completed for the joined body (50), wherein the predesigned weld portion is previously stored to be retrieved at the processing device (10); and
determine a goodness of the joined body (50) by using the calculated distance (D).--
20. The storage medium according to claim 19, wherein the program further configured to cause the processing device to inspect the weld portion using the intensity data.
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, 4-7, 9-12 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanishiki (US 2008/0210009 A1) in view of Ramle et al. (US 2022/0196611 A1; hereinafter “Ramle”).
1. Tanishiki teaches a processing device 5 (Fig. 2), configured to (See figs. 5, 7, reproduced below):
receive, via a detector 2a (Figs. 1, 2) connected to the processing device (5), intensity data of a reflected wave obtained by transmitting an ultrasonic wave from the detector (2a) along a first direction toward a joined body 70 (formed by spotwelding together two separate bodies 74 and 76. See, e.g., Abstract; Pars. 0077-0078; Tanishiki claim 1), the detector (2a) configured to transmit the ultrasonic wave, detect the reflected wave, and transmit the intensity data to be received at the processing device (5);
designate a weld portion (72) of the joined body (70) by using the intensity data (See, e.g., Abstract; Pars. 0100, 0109);
calculate a first center position (= real center position 72b/72a) of the designated weld portion (72) in a first plane (P-Q) crossing the first direction (See, e.g., Abstract; Pars. 0100, 0109);
calculate, in the first plane (P-Q), a distance (δp*δq) between the first center position (72b/72a) of the designated weld portion (72) and a second center position (71b/71a) of a predesigned weld portion (71) tentatively to be completed for the joined body 70 (as is evident from at least fig. 7), wherein the predesigned weld portion (71) is previously stored to be retrieved at the processing device (5); and
inspect the designated weld portion (72) by using the first center position (real center position 72b/72a; See, e.g., Abstract; Par.0116).
Note: Tanishiki anticipates that a first/real center position (72b/72a) of a completed real weld portion (72) of a joined body (70) does not always correspond to a second/tentative center position (71b/71a) of a predesigned weld portion (71) tentatively to be completed for the joined body (70). Tanishiki therefore utilizes an ultrasonic probe 2a (Figs. 1, 2) to receive intensity data of a reflected wave obtained by transmitting an ultrasonic wave along a first direction toward the joined body (70) to detect and designate the completed real weld portion (72). Tanishiki then calculates the first/real center position (72b/72a) of the real weld portion (72) and the second/tentative center position (71b/71a) of the predesigned weld portion 71 (as is evident from at least fig. 7). Tanishiki thereby can better inspect the completed real weld portion (72) by using the first/real center position 72b/72a (See, e.g., Abstract; Pars. 0100, 0109).
PNG
media_image1.png
1084
826
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
970
774
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Tanishiki doesn’t teach: determine a goodness of the joined body (70) by using the calculated distance (δp*δq). Saying another way, Tanishiki doesn’t teach:
if the device determines that the calculated distance (δp*δq) between the first/real center position (72b/72a) of the real weld portion (72) and the second/tentative center position (71b/71a) of the predesigned weld portion (71) is within a threshold distance, the device would determine that the real weld portion (72) is good (since the first/real center position 72b/72a of the real weld portion 72 having a diameter is matching or lose to the second/tentative center position 71b/71a of the predesigned weld portion 71). The device thereby would determine that structural quality of the joined body (70) is good because there is likely no or little offset of the real weld portion (72) from the predesigned weld portion (71).
Otherwise, if the device determines that the calculated distance (δp*δq) between the first/real center position (72b/72a) of the real weld portion (72) and the second/tentative center position (71b/71a) of the predesigned weld portion (71) is greater than the threshold distance, the device would determine that the real weld portion (72) is not good (since the first/real center position 72b/72a of the real weld portion 72 having a diameter is neither matching nor close to the second/tentative center position 71b/71a of the predesigned weld portion 71). The device thereby would determine that structural quality of the joined body (70) is not good because there is likely a significant offset of the first/real center position (72b/72a) from the second/tentative center position (71b/71a).
Ramle teaches a processing device, configured to detect a position anomaly of a weld 14 (= test object 14 on a car body 16 for example) based on a comparison between a position of the weld (14) and a reference position (which may be a tentative position of a predesigned weld portion tentatively to be completed for the car body 16. See, e.g., Figs. 1, 2, reproduced below; Abstract; Par. 0029).
PNG
media_image3.png
1132
712
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
806
798
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to apply Ramle teaching to Tanishiki device by having the device configured to detect a position anomaly of the designated/completed real weld portion (72) based on a comparison between the first/real center position (72b/72a) of the designated/completed real weld portion (72) and a reference position which may be the second/tentative position (71b/71a) of the predesigned weld portion (71) tentatively to be completed for the joined body (70), in order to determine accuracy of the designated/completed real weld portion (72). Therefore, it would also have been obvious that:
if the device determines that the calculated distance (δp*δq) between the first/real center position (72b/72a) of the real weld portion (72) and the second/tentative center position (71b/71a) of the predesigned weld portion (71) is within a threshold distance, the device would determine that the real weld portion (72) is good (since the first/real center position 72b/72a of the real weld portion 72 having a diameter is matching or lose to the second/tentative center position 71b/71a of the predesigned weld portion 71). The device thereby would determine that structural quality of the joined body (70) is good because there is likely no or little offset of the real weld portion (72) from the predesigned weld portion (71).
Otherwise, if the device determines that the calculated distance (δp*δq) between the first/real center position (72b/72a) of the real weld portion (72) and the second/tentative center position (71b/71a) of the predesigned weld portion (71) is greater than the threshold distance, the device would determine that the real weld portion (72) is not good (since the first/real center position 72b/72a of the real weld portion 72 having a diameter is neither matching nor close to the second/tentative center position 71b/71a of the predesigned weld portion 71). The device thereby would determine that structural quality of the joined body (70) is not good because there is likely a significant offset of the first/real center position (72b/72a) from the second/tentative center position (71b/71a).
Therefore, the device would be able to determine a goodness of the joined body (70) by using the calculated distance (as claimed). It would also have been obvious to further configure the device to output a notification to a user to reject any joined body (70) that are not good, thereby avoiding a bad joined body being manufactured and/or used (as further claimed in claims 4, 7 and 15).
4. Tanishiki as modified teaches the processing device according to claim 1, wherein the processing device outputs a first notification to a user when a value based on the distance is greater than a first threshold (as is obvious from the discussion above in claim 1).
5. Tanishiki as modified teaches the processing device according to claim 1, wherein the processing device inspects the weld portion by using a diameter of the designated weld portion 72 (as is obvious from the discussion above in claim 1. See, e.g., Tanishiki fig. 7; Abstract; Pars. 0096, 0116).
6. Tanishiki as modified teaches the processing device according to claim 5, wherein the processing device determines an accuracy of the inspection of the weld portion by using the distance (as is obvious from the discussion above in claim 1).
7. Tanishiki as modified teaches the processing device according to claim 6, wherein the processing device outputs a second notification to a user when a value based on the distance is greater than a second threshold (as is obvious from the discussion above in claim 1. Note that such a second threshold appears to be arbitrary and/or may be essentially the same as the first threshold, depending on a design choice based on a degree of goodness that a user wants the joined body to be).
9. Tanishiki as modified teaches the detecting system according to claim 1, further comprising:
a manipulator (including a robot arm 4 shown in Tanishiki figs. 1 & 2; or a testing robot 20 shown in Ramle fig. 1),
the detector (ultrasonic probe 2a, or sensor 24) being located at a distal end of the manipulator (as shown in Tanishiki fig. 1 & 2, Ramle fig. 1).
10. Tanishiki as modified teaches the detecting system according to claim 9, further comprising:
a control device 5 (Tanishiki fig. 2) configured to control the manipulator,
the control device (5) correcting a position of the detector (ultrasonic probe 2a) by operating the manipulator (robot arm 4) to reduce a distance (δp*δq) between the first/real center position (72b/72a) and a second center position (71b/71a) of the intensity data in the first plane (P-Q) when a value based on the distance (δp*δq) is greater than a first threshold (so as to inspect the real weld portion 72 by using the first/real center position 72b/72a. See discussion above in claim 1; Tanishiki Abstract; Par.0116),
the detector (2a) transmitting the ultrasonic wave toward the weld portion and detecting the reflected wave at the corrected position 72b/72a (as discussed above in claim 1. See, e.g., Tanishiki Abstract; Par.0116).
11 (essentially equivalent to claim 1).
Tanishiki as modified teaches a processing method (Tanishiki par. 0001: “method”), comprising:
receiving, via a detector (2a) connected to a processing device (5), intensity data of a reflected wave obtained by transmitting an ultrasonic wave along a first direction toward a joined body (70), the detector (2a) configured to transmit the ultrasonic wave, detect the reflected wave, and transmit the intensity data to be received at the processing device (5);
designating a weld portion (72) of the joined body (70) by using the intensity data;
calculating a first center position (72b/72a) of the designated weld portion (72) in a first plane (P-Q) crossing the first direction;
calculating, in the first plane (P-Q), a distance (δp*δq) between the first center position of the designated weld portion (72) and a second center position (71b/71a) of a predesigned weld portion (71) tentatively to be completed for the joined body (70), wherein the predesigned weld portion (71) is previously stored to be retrieved at the processing device (5); and
determining a goodness of the joined body (70) by using the calculated distance (See discussion above in claim 1).
12 (essentially equivalent to claim 1).
Tanishiki as modified teaches an inspection method, comprising:
the processing method according to claim 11; and
inspecting the weld portion using the intensity data (as is obvious from the discussion above in claim 1).
15 (essentially equivalent to claim 4).
Tanishiki as modified teaches the processing method according to claim 11, further comprising: outputting a first notification to a user when a value based on the distance is greater than a first threshold (as discussed above in claims 1 and 4).
16. Tanishiki as modified teaches the inspection method according to claim 12, wherein in the inspecting, a diameter of the designated weld portion is calculated using the intensity data and the weld portion is inspected based on the diameter (as is obvious from the discussion above in claim 1. See, e.g., Tanishiki fig. 7, Abstract; Pars. 0096, 0116).
17 (essentially equivalent to claim 6).
The inspection method according to claim 16, further comprising: determining an accuracy of the inspection of the weld portion by using the distance (as discussed above in claims 1 and 6).
18 (essentially equivalent to claim 7).
Tanishiki as modified teaches the inspection method according to claim 16, further comprising: outputting a second notification to a user when a value based on the distance is greater than a second threshold (as discussed above in claim 7).
19 (essentially equivalent to claim 1).
Tanishiki as modified teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program (Tanishiki pars. 0137-0141), the program configured to cause a processing device (5) to:
receive, via a detector 2a (Figs. 1, 2) connected to the processing device (5), intensity data of a reflected wave obtained by transmitting an ultrasonic wave along a first direction toward a joined body (70), the detector (2a) configured to transmit the ultrasonic wave, detect the reflected wave, and transmit the intensity data to be received at the processing device (5);
designate a weld portion (72) of the joined body (70) by using the intensity data;
calculate a first center position (72b/72a) of the designated weld portion (72) in a first plane (P-Q) crossing the first direction;
calculate, in the first plane (P-Q), a distance (δp*δq) between the first center position (72b/72a) of the designated weld portion (72) and a second center position (71b/71a) of a predesigned weld portion tentatively to be completed for the joined body (70), wherein the predesigned weld portion (71) is previously stored to be retrieved at the processing device (5); and
determine a goodness of the joined body (70) by using the calculated distance (See discussion above in claim 1).
20. Tanishiki as modified teaches the storage medium according to claim 19, wherein the program further configured to cause the processing device to inspect the weld portion using the intensity data (See discussion above in claim 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nguyen (Wyn) Q. Ha whose telephone number is (571) 272-2863, email: nguyenq.ha@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4:30 pm (Eastern Time).
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/Nguyen Q. Ha/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 January 22, 2026