DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim 1 is 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the roller disk receiver" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomioka et al. (8,250,720) in view of Wilson (5,099,558). Regarding claim 1, Tomioka discloses a system comprising a roller tool (52; Fig. 1) for rolling a workpiece (10) and a fixture (28,36; col. 11, lines 40-43). The roller tool comprising an adaptor plate (turret plate, 40; col. 9, line 27) proximate an adapter end (axial end portion; col. 9, line 28), an arm (56,74) attached to the adaptor plate (40) at an arm adapter end at an end portion (58,60; Fig. 1, col. 9, lines 54-57) of the arm part (56) proximate the adaptor plate (40; Fig. 3). The arm (56,74) comprises a roller end (80; Fig. 2) opposite the adapter end (58,60; Fig. 1), the arm comprising a midspan portion (Fig. 1) between the adapter end (58,60) and the roller end (80) and a roller disk (86) is joined to the arm at the roller end (80), the roller disk is configured to contact the workpiece (Fig. 1). The roller disk (86) is connected at the roller end (80) by a roller disk support (84), the roller disk support (84) comprising a pair of forks (bottom portion of support walls 84; Fig. 1) which connect to the roller disk (86) through an axle (88) to support the roller disk between the pair of forks. Tomioka does not disclose a fluted roller disk support.
Wilson teaches a forked roller support (32,33,34; Fig. 3) including a fluted portion (32) which is a thickened portion (fluted) of the forked roller support and extends distally from a narrower forked roller disk receiver (33,34), the forked roller disk receiver connects a roller (37) through an axle (35). It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to flute the roller holder portion of the roller support of Tomioka as taught by Wilson in order to provide a widened roller holder that is thicker and of greater rigidity and strength than the narrower forked roller holder portion.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Tomioka discloses an interlock feature comprising two branches (upper portion of support walls 84; Fig. 1) that is a connector portion formed in the roller disk support (84) that spans a Y-shape and connects to the arm through a connector comprising screws (110,112; col. 10, lines 66-67 and col. 11, lines 1 and 5-8) which is configured to mate the roller disk support (84) with the arm (56,74) at a top end of the roller disk support (84). From Applicant's Fig. 41 the claimed interlock feature (430) appears to be an integral top portion of the forks and this is the Examiner's reading of the upper fork branches of the support walls (84) of Tomioka being an interlock feature.
Regarding claim 4, Tomioka discloses that the roller disk support (84) comprises an axle (88) spanning the pair of forks (bottom portion of support walls 84; Fig. 1), the axle is configured to support the roller disk (86; col. 10, lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 5, Wilson teaches two thickened portions (32; Fig. 3) extending from a bore connection at plate (31), which narrow at ridges toward the bifurcated roller disk receiver ends (33,34).
Regarding claim 6, Tomioka discloses the roller disk support (84) includes bores (Fig. 1; col. 11, lines 4-6) to accept the screw (110) and the setscrew (112) wherein the screws (110,112) are screwed into the roller end (80).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomioka et al. (8,250,720) in view of Wilson (5,099,558) and further in view of Nemoto (5,003,806). Tomioka in view of Wilson does not disclose that the pair of forks comprise an outer surface that is hemispherical. Nemoto teaches (Fig.9) that a forked roller support (38) for holding a roller (37) is hemispherically shaped (three-dimensionally rounded shaped). It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to round the ends of the forked roller support of Tomioka in view of Wilson as taught by Nemeto in order to provide a smooth, rounded exterior of the roller support as opposed to a rectangular sharper edge.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8-6-2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The term “fluted” is read as broadly as ridged by the Examiner. The reference to Wilson teaches a thickened portion (32) which narrows in a width direction (Fig. 3) in a flute (ridge) to the roller disk receiver (33,34). This thickened portion (32) adds stiffness to the forked roller support (32,33,34) and prevents bending in the forks. Applicant describes ([00117], line 4) “The fluted portion 452 allows for a narrow profile and reduces the incidence of contact with the workpiece” and the Wilson portion (32) narrows in a ridge to allow for a narrower profile in the roller disk receiver (33,34) which reduces the incidence of contact with the workpiece. Applicant argues “The Office Action confuses the meaning of a thickened portion 32 with a fluted portion as claimed. A fluted portion is a groove or channel. A fluted portion is never confused as meaning a thickened portion by one of ordinary skill in the art. The fluted portion can be seen in the application at Fig. 39 which shows the groove shape of the fluted portion 452. A groove is opposite the meaning of a thickened portion.”
Applicant’s specification [0117] recites “The fluted portion 452 can be formed along a length of the roller disk support 426 spanning from the roller disk receiver 452”. In claim 1 there is no antecedent basis for the roller disk receiver and since the specification recites that the “fluted portion 452” and “the roller disk receiver 452” are the same thing it is difficult to interpret a structure of the roller disk receiver in claim 1 and if it is supposed to be a different limitation than the fluted portion as claimed. It is not clear that fluted portion has to necessarily be read as a groove or channel as argued by Applicant when the specification does not describe the fluted portion 452 or the roller disk receiver 452 as being a channel or groove. The Fig. 39 embodiment might support the channel or groove reading of “fluted portion” but Fig. 37 (452) points to an arm of a fork which is similar to the fork arms as in Tomioka and Wilson and does not appear to be a channel or groove unless Fig. 38 (452) is supposed to refer to a channel between forks which Wilson clearly shows in Fig. 3. It is not clear from Fig. 38 that a fluted portion 452 is a channel or groove as argued. The dictionary reference cited shows that fluted is read as broadly as ridge or rib which Wilson teaches wherein thickened portion (32) has a rib or ridge which narrows in a thickness direction toward the roller disk receiver (33,34).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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
Prosecution Insights