DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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 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.
Examiner’s Note
This Office Action is in response to application filed on 10/30/2023, where claims 1-13 are currently pending.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claim 6, the primary reason that the instant claim is allowable over the European Patent Doc. No. 0839604A1 (Mizuno), the Japanese Patent Doc. No. 2003223205A (Iwasaki), the Japanese Patent Doc. No. 2021024055A (Hatano), the Chinese Patent Doc. No. 103826798A (Lemaire), and the Japanese Patent Doc. No. 2008310402A (Ryu), is because although the cited prior art teach substantially similar invention of machining spectacle lens and monitoring for abnormalities; however, neither alone nor in combination, the cited prior art teach when content of an operation defect is related to machining on an edge shape of lens, check operation on a motor that moves the lens in a direction along lens holding shafts that hold the lens by interposing the lens between the lens holding shafts. Therefore, the cited prior art do not teach each and every limitation as presented in claim 6.
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.
Claims 1, 7, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mizuno et al., (EP 0839604 A1) (hereinafter Mizuno).
Referring to claim 1, Mizuno teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a state management program executed by a control apparatus configured to control an eyeglasses lens machining apparatus in order to manage a state of the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus,
the state management program comprising instructions which, when executed by a processor of the control apparatus, cause the control apparatus to perform:
a check operation execution step of causing the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus to execute a check operation for checking a state of the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus (9:56-10:6, “the abrasive wheels (or the rotational shaft 61a) are constantly checked for the state of their rotation to thereby ensure the detection of any abnormal rotations of the abrasive wheels which will occur in certain cases such as where there occurs something abnormal in the belt 64 transmitting the rotation of the AC motor 65 or where vapor condensation on the machine or other phenomena cause a slip between the pulley 63 and the belt 64.”); and
a result output step of outputting information indicating a result of the executed check operation (10:6-16, “If, after the lens stops rotating, the number of rotations of the abrasive wheels does not return to the threshold level for the start of lens rotation upon the lapse of a specified time period, a STOP signal is issued to stop the rotational driving of the AC motor 65 and, at the same time, an ERROR or other suitable information to indicate the occurrence of something abnormal is displayed in the display section 3. This procedure not only prevents the machine from being damaged but also notifies the operator of the need to check it for any abnormal parts.”)
Referring to claim 7, Mizuno further teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the check operation to be executed in the check operation execution step includes a movement amount check operation of performing an instruction for causing at least one motor provided in the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus to move a target object by a predetermined amount, and
in a case where the movement amount check operation is executed, information indicating a relationship between a movement amount instructed to the motor and a movement amount of the target object actually moved is output in the result output step (9:56-10:13, “the abrasive wheels (or the rotational shaft 61a) are constantly checked for the state of their rotation to thereby ensure the detection of any abnormal rotations of the abrasive wheels…If, after the lens stops rotating, the number of rotations of the abrasive wheels does not return to the threshold level for the start of lens rotation upon the lapse of a specified time period, a STOP signal is issued to stop the rotational driving of the AC motor 65 and, at the same time, an ERROR or other suitable information to indicate the occurrence of something abnormal is displayed in the display section 3.”)
Referring to claim 9, Mizuno further teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1, wherein in the result output step, result information of the check operation is output by causing a display unit to display an identifier indicating the result information (10:11-13, “an ERROR or other suitable information to indicate the occurrence of something abnormal is displayed in the display section 3.”)
Regarding claim 10, the instant claim recites the method that stored on the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 1; therefore, the same rationale of rejection is applicable.
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 of this title, 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 2-4, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuno as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and in view of Iwasaki et al., (JP 2003223205A) (hereinafter Iwasaki).
Referring to claim 2, Mizuno further teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the state management program causes the control apparatus to further perform:
an operation defect information acquisition step of acquiring operation defect information indicating a content of an operation defect in the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus (10:2-9, “there occurs something abnormal in the belt 64 transmitting the rotation of the AC motor 65 or where vapor condensation on the machine or other phenomena cause a slip between the pulley 63 and the belt 64. If, after the lens stops rotating, the number of rotations of the abrasive wheels does not return to the threshold level for the start of lens rotation upon the lapse of a specified time period”. Examiner recognizes the information regarding abnormal rotation of the abrasive wheels as the operation defect information.)
Mizuno teaches the limitations above. However, Mizuno does not explicitly teach a check operation for checking a cause of the operation defect indicated by the operation defect information is executed.
Iwasaki teaches a check operation for checking a cause of the operation defect indicated by the operation defect information is executed (¶ [0043], “the abnormality detection unit 50 monitors the occurrence of abnormalities during machining operations, such as collisions, excessive tool wear, tool damage, chatter, etc., based on the motor current of the spindle/feed axis drive unit 49.” ¶ [0045]-[0053], a list of checks is performed in sequence to determine the cause of the abnormalities.)
Mizuno and Iwasaki are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are concerning with detecting abnormalities in machines (i.e., same field of endeavor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having Mizuno and Iwasaki before them to modify the eyeglass lens grinding machine of Mizuno to incorporate the function of sequentially checking cause of machining abnormalities as taught by Iwasaki. One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the elements as claimed by known methods as disclosed by Iwasaki (¶ [0042]-[0054]), because the function of sequentially checking cause of machining abnormalities does not depend on the eyeglass lens grinding machine. That is the function of sequentially checking cause of machining abnormalities performs the same function independent on which interface it is incorporated onto, and therefore, the result of the combination would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. The motivation to combine would have been to reduce the number of defective products as suggested by Iwasaki (¶ [0054]).
Referring to claim 3, Mizuno teaches the limitations above. However, Mizuno does not explicitly teach among a plurality of the check operations, one or a plurality of check operations associated with the operation defect information are executed by the…machining apparatus.
Iwasaki further teaches among a plurality of the check operations, one or a plurality of check operations associated with the operation defect information are executed by the…machining apparatus (¶ [0045]-[0053], a list of checks is performed in sequence to determine the cause of the abnormalities.)
Referring to claim 4, Mizuno further teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 2, wherein in a case where the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus detects an operation defect that occurs in the apparatus,
in the operation defect information acquisition step, operation defect information indicating a content of the detected operation defect is acquired (10:2-9, “there occurs something abnormal in the belt 64 transmitting the rotation of the AC motor 65 or where vapor condensation on the machine or other phenomena cause a slip between the pulley 63 and the belt 64. If, after the lens stops rotating, the number of rotations of the abrasive wheels does not return to the threshold level for the start of lens rotation upon the lapse of a specified time period”. Examiner recognizes the information regarding abnormal rotation of the abrasive wheels as the operation defect information.)
Regarding claims 11 and 12, these claims recite the method that stored on the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claims 2 and 3 respectively; therefore, the same rationale of rejection is applicable.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuno in view of Iwasaki as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Lemaire et al., (CN 103826798A) (hereinafter Lemaire).
Referring to claim 5, Mizuno in view of Iwasaki teach the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 2. However, Mizuno in view of Iwasaki do not explicitly teach the operation defect information input to the control apparatus by a user is acquired.
Lemaire teaches the operation defect information input to the control apparatus by a user is acquired (¶ [0137], “the machining speed of the lens is taken into account, and it is also possible to detect faults or problems in the machining process of the lens, such as errors in the material of the lens to be trimmed, as input by the user.”)
Mizuno, Iwasaki, and Lemaire are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are concerning with detecting abnormalities (i.e., same field of endeavor).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention having Mizuno in view of Iwasaki and Lemaire before them to substitute the fault detection as taught by Lemaire for the generic monitoring of abnormalities of Mizuno in view of Iwasaki. Because both Mizuno in view of Iwasaki and Lemaire teach methods of detecting issue in machining lens, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one known method for the other to achieve the predictable result of fault detection technology. The motivation would have been to use the detection method that best suits the needs of the specific system.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuno as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Hatano, (JP 2021024055A) (hereinafter Hatano).
Referring to claim 8, Mizuno teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1. However, Mizuno does not explicitly teach the check operation to be executed in the check operation execution step includes a datum movement check operation of causing at least one motor provided in the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus to move a target object to a datum position, and
in a case where the datum movement check operation is executed, information indicating a detection result of the datum position is output in the result output step.
Hatano teaches the check operation to be executed in the check operation execution step includes a datum movement check operation of causing at least one motor provided in the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus to move a target object to a datum position (¶ [0051], “When the power switch of the lens processing device 1 is turned on, the arithmetic control circuit 19 starts up, checks whether a dedicated application on the tablet terminal 2 connected via USB is running, checks each drive origin and movement limit point within the lens processing device 1, and sends the presence or absence of an abnormality to the tablet terminal 2.”), and
in a case where the datum movement check operation is executed, information indicating a detection result of the datum position is output in the result output step (¶ [0051], “If there is an abnormality in the status information from any of the origin and position sensors, a message informing the user of the abnormality corresponding to the abnormality is displayed on the screen of the tablet terminal 2”.)
Mizuno and Hatano are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are concerning with spectacle lens processing apparatus (i.e., same field of endeavor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having Mizuno and Hatano before them to modify the method of monitoring rotation of abrasive wheels of Mizuno to incorporate the function of checking each drive origin and movement limit point as taught by Hatano. One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the elements as claimed by known methods as disclosed by Hatano (¶ [0051]-[0052]), because the function of checking each drive origin and movement limit point does not depend on the method of monitoring rotation of abrasive wheels. That is the function of checking each drive origin and movement limit point performs the same function independent on which interface it is incorporated onto, and therefore, the result of the combination would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. The motivation to combine would have been to notify user of abnormality before the processing of the spectacle lens is started as suggested by Hatano (¶ [0051]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuno et al., (EP 0839604 A1) (hereinafter Mizuno) in view of Ryu, (JP 2008310402A) (hereinafter Ryu).
Referring to claim 13, Mizuno teaches a state management method of an eyeglasses lens machining apparatus, which is performed in an eyeglasses lens machining system including the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus that machines an eyeglasses lens and an information processing apparatus that enables to acquire information related to the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus, the state management method comprising:
a check operation execution in which the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus executes a check operation for checking a state (9:56-10:6, “the abrasive wheels (or the rotational shaft 61a) are constantly checked for the state of their rotation to thereby ensure the detection of any abnormal rotations of the abrasive wheels which will occur in certain cases such as where there occurs something abnormal in the belt 64 transmitting the rotation of the AC motor 65 or where vapor condensation on the machine or other phenomena cause a slip between the pulley 63 and the belt 64.”);
a result output in which the eyeglasses lens machining apparatus outputs result information indicating a result of the executed check operation (10:6-16, “If, after the lens stops rotating, the number of rotations of the abrasive wheels does not return to the threshold level for the start of lens rotation upon the lapse of a specified time period, a STOP signal is issued to stop the rotational driving of the AC motor 65 and, at the same time, an ERROR or other suitable information to indicate the occurrence of something abnormal is displayed in the display section 3. This procedure not only prevents the machine from being damaged but also notifies the operator of the need to check it for any abnormal parts.”)
Mizuno teaches the limitations above. However, Mizuno does not explicitly teach an analysis in which…acquires the result information output in the result output step, and analyzes the acquired result information by using an analysis tool constructed in advance.
Ryu teaches an analysis in which…acquires the result information output in the result output step, and analyzes the acquired result information by using an analysis tool constructed in advance (¶ [0006], “when a problem with the work device is discovered by the monitoring device, the trouble information is sent to the information management device via the communication device. Furthermore, the information management device is provided with a trouble information database that stores trouble examples in the work device and methods for dealing with them in association with each other, analyzes trouble information sent from the work unit to determine whether it corresponds to a trouble example stored in the trouble information database, and if a corresponding trouble example is found, sends the method for dealing with it to the work unit via the communication device”. Examiner notes, the analysis tool is inherently constructed in advance before it can be used to analyze the trouble information.)
Mizuno and Ryu are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are concerning with interface for monitoring and detecting abnormalities (i.e., same field of endeavor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having Mizuno and Ryu before them to modify the eyeglass lens grinding machine of Mizuno to incorporate the function of analyzing trouble information as taught by Ryu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the elements as claimed by known methods as disclosed by Ryu (¶ [0006]-[0009]), because the function of analyzing trouble information does not depend on the eyeglass lens grinding machine. That is the function of analyzing trouble information performs the same function independent on which interface it is incorporated onto, and therefore, the result of the combination would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. The motivation to combine would have been to improve the system by providing information on how to deal with problem(s) arise with a work apparatus as suggested by Ryu (¶ [0006]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
US 20150314411 (Samukawa) – discloses lens edging system and method for detecting tool exchange time.
US 20070097525 (Guillermin) – discloses method for trimming a spectacle lens.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONG-SHUNE CHUNG whose telephone number is (571) 270-5817. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (9-5) EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3644. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/MONG-SHUNE CHUNG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118