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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 1-15 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (U.S. PGPub 2022/0080517, cited in IDS) in view of Spitzenberger (U.S. PGPub 2010/0158620).
Claim 1: Yoshida discloses a cutting tool (end mill 1) comprising a tool body (3) that includes an insert mounting part (pockets 91 and 92) wherein the insert mounting part is configured to mount a cutting insert (2C and 2P) including an upper surface (10), a lower surface (20), a peripheral side surface (30 - including 31-34), a cutting edge (along 10R and 20R - paragraph 31), and a hole (40) for a screw (9), the peripheral side surface including curved corner parts (R1-R4), the cutting edge being formed at a part of an upper intersecting edge of the upper surface and the peripheral side surface (e.g. Fig. 3), and a lower intersecting edge of the lower surface and the peripheral side surface (Id.), and the hole penetrating the upper surface to the lower surface (Fig. 5), wherein the insert mounting part has a shape including a bottom surface that comes into contact with at least a part of the upper surface or the lower surface of the cutting insert (evident in Fig. 8), a constraint surface (angled surface contacting the upper portion of the insert in Fig. 9 - see paragraphs 31 and 48) that is a surface including a portion that comes into contact with at least a part of a constraint target surface formed as a surface of the peripheral side surface of the cutting insert, the constraint surface of the insert mounting part inclining with respect to the upper surface or the lower surface of the cutting insert (surface 32 or 34 of the insert), and whose inclination angle with respect to the bottom surface is an acute angle (evident as cited above), an evacuation part that is formed at a part that the upper intersecting edge or the lower intersecting edge of the cutting insert approaches so as to have a shape that prevents contact between the cutting edge and the constraint surface (e.g. the unlabeled channel having an arcuate cross section in the seat 91/92 along the bottom edge of the insert), and a relief part that is formed at a part that the corner parts of the cutting insert approach so as to surround the corner parts (a corner relief cavity is shown but not labeled at the internal corner of the seats).
Yoshida further discloses a first protrusion area that extends hiding a part of the cutting insert mounted on the insert mounting part, as seen from a direction perpendicular to the bottom surface (the acute angular wall portion of the seat as shown in Fig. 9 would “hide” or overhang at least part of the lower surface of the insert in contact with the bottom surface of the seat if viewing from the perpendicular to the bottom surface of the seat. Specifically, the portion of this wall located toward the radial exterior of the tool may be labeled a “first protrusion area”), and a second protrusion area that extends from an upper side of the relief part so as to cover the part of the upper surface or the lower surface of the cutting insert mounted on the insert mounting part, as seen from the direction perpendicular to the bottom surface (the portion the acute angular wall which is proximal to the corner relief would cover or overhang at least the lower surface of the insert in contact with the bottom surface of the seat). It is also noted that whether or not the first and second protrusion areas would cover the part of the upper surface of the cutting insert would be partially dependent on the geometry of the cutting insert, where the insert is not positively recited as part of the claimed invention. Thus, a different hypothetical insert in combination with the tool of Yoshida may read on the claim. For example, a thinner insert of an otherwise similar shape might be seated such that its upper surface is positioned relatively closer to the constraint surface thus also partially hidden or covered thereby.
Yoshida does not explicitly show or describe a female screw part for a fixing screw inserted in the hole, though it could be presumed from the remaining disclosure. Nevertheless, Spitzenberger teaches a tool having a female screw part (88) for a fixing screw inserted in the hole (paragraph 25). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the female screw part as taught by Spitzenberger in order to have provided a means for screwing the insert into the tool.
Alternatively to the above with regard to the evacuation part, Spitzenberger also teaches an insert mounting part having an evacuation part (104a, 106a) that is formed at a part that an upper intersecting edge or a lower intersecting edge of a cutting insert approaches so as to have a shape that allows evacuation from a constraint surface (78, 80) hedging the cutting edge. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided such an evacuation part in the insert mounting part(s) of Yoshida in order to have provided additional clearance to the cutting insert (e.g. Spitzenberger, paragraph 30).
It is noted that Spitzenberger also more clearly depicts evacuation and relief parts (104b and 106b and corner pocket 86) as similarly cited in Yoshida above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided these features in the insert mounting part(s) of Yoshida in order to have provided additional clearance to the cutting insert (e.g. Spitzenberger, paragraph 30).
Claim 19: Yoshida discloses a cutting tool (end mill 1) comprising a tool body (3) that includes an insert mounting part (pockets 91 and 92), wherein the insert mounting part is configured to mount a cutting insert (2C and 2P) including an upper surface (10), a lower surface (20), a peripheral side surface (30 - including 31-34), a cutting edge (along 10R and 20R - paragraph 31), and a hole (40) for a screw (9), the peripheral side surface including curved corner parts (R1-R4), the cutting edge being formed at a part of an upper intersecting edge of the upper surface and the peripheral side surface (e.g. Fig. 3), and a lower intersecting edge of the lower surface and the peripheral side surface (Id.), and the hole penetrating the upper surface to the lower surface (Fig. 5), wherein the insert mounting part has a shape including a bottom surface that comes into contact with at least a part of the upper surface or the lower surface of the cutting insert (evident in Fig. 8), a constraint surface (angled surface contacting the upper portion of the insert in Fig. 9 - see paragraphs 31 and 48) that is a surface including a portion that comes into contact with at least a part of a constraint target surface formed as a surface of the peripheral side surface of the cutting insert, the constraint surface of the insert mounting part inclining with respect to the upper surface or the lower surface of the cutting insert (surface 32 or 34 of the insert), and whose inclination angle with respect to the bottom surface is an acute angle (evident as cited above), a relief part that is formed at a part that the corner parts of the cutting insert approach so as to surround the corner parts (a corner relief cavity is shown but not labeled at the internal corner of the seats), and a protrusion area that extends from an upper side of the relief part so as to cover a part of the upper surface of the cutting insert mounted on the insert mounting part, (the acute angular wall portion of the seat as shown in Fig. 9, specifically the portion thereof which is proximal to the corner relief, would cover or overhang at least the lower surface of the insert in contact with the bottom surface of the seat). It is also noted that whether or not the protrusion area would cover the part of the upper surface of the cutting insert would be partially dependent on the geometry of the cutting insert, where the insert is not positively recited as part of the claimed invention. Thus, a different hypothetical insert in combination with the tool of Yoshida may read on the claim. For example, a thinner insert of an otherwise similar shape might be seated such that its upper surface is positioned relatively closer to the constraint surface thus also partially hidden or covered thereby.
Yoshida does not explicitly show or describe a female screw part for a fixing screw inserted in the hole, though it could be presumed from the remaining disclosure. Nevertheless, Spitzenberger teaches a tool having a female screw part (88) for a fixing screw inserted in the hole (paragraph 25). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the female screw part as taught by Spitzenberger in order to have provided a means for screwing the insert into the tool.
It is noted that Spitzenberger also more clearly depicts a relief part (corner pocket 86) as similarly cited in Yoshida above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided this feature in the insert mounting part(s) of Yoshida in order to have provided additional clearance to the cutting insert (e.g. Spitzenberger, paragraph 30).
See annotated Figs. 2 and 9 of Yoshida below for various features as interpreted above.
PNG
media_image1.png
930
956
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
901
574
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: Referring to Yoshida, the first protrusion area and/or the second protrusion area are formed protruding to a position such that a center axis of the hole of the cutting insert is shifted by at least a predetermined amount with respect to the female screw part when the cutting insert is seated on the insert mounting part in a predetermined incorrect posture (it is expected, given the complementary angular contact at the constraint surface, that a misoriented insert, e.g. where the angles were mirrored instead of complementary, would shift the screw holes out of alignment with one another, where the “predetermined amount” can be any amount).
Claim 3: The first protrusion area is formed on a surface extended from the constraint surface (it is effectively part of the same overall angular surface and thus extends therefrom).
Claim 4: An inclination angle of the first protrusion area and/or the second protrusion area with respect to the bottom surface is such a degree of an angle that, when the cutting insert is seated on the insert mounting part in a predetermined incorrect posture, the cutting insert is shifted by at least a predetermined amount from a predetermined correct seating position (this is similar to the discussion in claim 2, where any inclination angle would have this effect to some degree).
Claim 5: A height of the first protrusion area and/or the second protrusion area from the bottom surface is such a height that a center axis of the hole of the cutting insert seated at a posture that does not fit to the insert mounting part is shifted by at least a predetermined amount with respect to the female screw part (this is similar to the discussion in claim 2).
Claim 6: The predetermined amount is a shift amount at which screwing, to the female screw part, the fixing screw inserted in the hole of the cutting insert is not possible (presumably any substantial misalignment of the screw holes resulting from the above would make screwing practically impossible compared to properly aligned holes).
Claim 7: The cutting insert has a substantially rectangular shape in top view toward the upper surface and in bottom view toward the lower surface (e.g. paragraph 36).
Claim 8: The upper surface and the lower surface of the cutting insert each have a rectangular shape whose lengths of a first side of the upper intersecting edge or the lower intersecting edge, and a third side facing the first side are longer than lengths of a second side and a fourth side facing the second side (e.g. paragraph 36).
Claim 9: The constraint target surface is formed on a surface of the peripheral side surface of the cutting insert adjacent to the second side or the fourth side, and the constraint surface of the insert mounting part is formed at a position facing the constraint target surface - (paragraphs 31 and 48).
Claim 10: The constraint target surface forms a flank whose clearance angle is positive with respect to a cutting edge provided on the second side (e.g. Figs. 5-6, essentially the same as in the instant application).
Claim 11: The cutting insert has a shape whose height from the lower surface to the upper intersecting edge or whose height from the upper surface to the lower intersecting edge decreases from the hole to the fourth side (evident in Figs. 5-6 and paragraph 42).
Claim 12: A portion of the peripheral side surface other than the constraint surface forms a flank whose clearance angle is negative with respect to a cutting edge provided on the first side (e.g. Figs. 5-6, essentially the same as in the instant application).
Claim 13: The cutting insert adopts an axially symmetrical structure in which, when the cutting insert reversely rotates 180° about an X axis as a rotational center that is a perpendicular line passing a center of the center axis of the hole and extends along the second side and the fourth side, a side of the upper surface and a side of the lower surface have a same shape (evident in the figures and e.g. paragraph 30).
Claim 14: The cutting insert adopts a structure in which three sides (e.g. 11-13) of four sides on the upper surface side and three sides of four sides on the lower surface side (the lower surface has the same structure) can be used as cutting edges (paragraph 31).
Claim 15: The cutting insert includes cutting edges provided to two adjacent corner parts of the corner parts (implied from the fact the cutting edge includes edge segments 11, 12, and 13, where corners R1 and R2 are within this edge path. There also appears to be a continuous edge from the drawings).
Claim 17: As the insert mounting part, two insert mounting parts (91, 92) on which the cutting inserts of a same shape are mounted at different postures, and that have mutually different orientations are provided (paragraph 32).
Claim 18: Each of the upper intersecting edge and the lower intersecting edge of the cutting insert comprises four sides (of a rectangle), the four sides including two long sides and two short sides having a length smaller than the two long sides (as a rectangle), and the two insert mounting parts include a first insert mounting part (91) on which the cutting insert is mounted at such a posture that long sides of the upper intersecting edge or the lower intersecting edge of the cutting insert are directed to a radial direction of the tool body (Fig. 1), and a second insert mounting part (92) on which the cutting insert is mounted at such a posture that the long sides are directed to a rotational axis direction of the tool body (Fig. 2).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida and Spitzenberger as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Inayama (JP2001328011, cited in IDS, with reference to translation).
Yoshida and Spitzenberger teach a cutting tool substantially as claimed except for wherein the center axis of the hole is perpendicular to the upper surface and the lower surface. Yoshida instead teaches that the center axis (O) of the mounting hole (40) of the cutting insert is inclined, which allows the insert to be pushed into the corner of the pocket 91/92 (e.g. paragraph 48). However, Inayama teaches a cutting tool wherein the center axis of a screw hole is perpendicular to the upper surface and the lower surface of the insert (e.g. Figs. 2-4). In this design, the tapered screw head 10a interacts with the conical counterbore 4a of the screw hole to a similar effect (paragraph 16). Because both Yoshida and Inayama teach methods for screwing a cutting insert in a manner which biases the angled surfaces of the insert into a complementary angled wall of a seat, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted one method for the other (including making the screw hole perpendicular) to achieve this predictable result (MPEP 2143 I. B.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended to independent claims to specify "a first protrusion area that extends hiding a part of the upper surface of the cutting insert mounted on the insert mounting part, as seen from a direction perpendicular to the bottom surface." Applicant argues that Yoshida does not disclose or even suggest any element corresponding to amended claim 1's first protrusion area 221p that extends hiding a part of the upper surface 18 of the cutting insert 10 mounted on the insert mounting part. However, this argument fails to address the examiner’s prior discussion regarding this feature (see previous OA e.g. at page 7). The limitation in question is notably dependent on the shape or structure of the cutting insert and how that shape interacts with the pocket of the holder, but the insert per se is not a positively recited aspect of the claim as now confirmed by Applicant (Remarks, top of page 10). Thus, the claimed structure of the cutting tool should stand on its own. However, it is not presently clear how the claimed first protrusion area would structurally distinguish itself from Yoshida in the event that a different insert (such as a thinner insert as contemplated in the rejection) were used in conjunction with the same pocket, for example.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW P TRAVERS whose telephone number is (571)272-3218. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00AM-6:30PM.
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, Sunil K. Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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.
/Matthew P Travers/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights