Detailed Action1
America Invents Act 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 USC 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.
Rejections under 35 USC 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112:
(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.
Claims 1-4 are 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 applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites a second symmetric surface which includes the central axis, and, a first reference surface which is parallel with the second flat surface and includes an edge line of the first cutting edge. It is unclear how these surfaces can “include” the central axis and edge line, respectively, since these are imaginary surfaces/planes. The examiner recommends amending these limitations to recite “a second symmetric surface which extends along the central axis”, and, “a first reference surface which is parallel with the second flat surface and extends along an edge line of the first cutting edge”.
Claim 2 recites the third flat surface is inclined so as to be closer to the second flat surface in a direction toward the base end part, and the fourth flat surface … is inclined so as to be closer to the first flat surface in the direction toward the base end part. It is unclear what element the third and fourth flat surfaces have to be closer than. The examiner recommends changing the phrase “to be closer” to “to move closer” or “to become closer”.
Claim 4 recites the base end side. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation.
Claim 3 is rejected for depending from claim 1.
Rejections under 35 USC 1032
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 obvious3 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPGPub No. 2022/0134444 (“Schmidt”) in view of USPGPub No. 2019/0030613 (“Larsson”).
Regarding claim 1, Schmidt teaches a turning tool (¶ [0002]-[0003] & [0006]) comprising: a replaceable cutting insert (10) (figs. 1-4, ¶ [0055]); and a tool body that secures the cutting insert (figs. 1-2, ¶ [0002], [0006] & [0065], wherein the cutting insert is connected to a tool body of the described cutting tool via a screw received in the hole 42), wherein the cutting insert is mirror-image symmetric with respect to a first symmetric surface (B-B’) which is perpendicular to a central axis (C-C’) of a mounting hole (42) (fig. 3, ¶ [0057]), and is mirror-image symmetric with respect to a second symmetric surface (A-A’) which includes the central axis (fig. 2, ¶ [0057]), the cutting insert has a front surface (12), a rear surface (14) which is on an opposite side to the front surface, a peripheral side surface (16) which connects the front surface and the rear surface (figs. 1-3, ¶ [0055]), and the mounting hole which penetrates the front surface and the rear surface (figs. 1-2, ¶ [0065]-[0066]), and the peripheral side surface is formed parallel with the central axis (figs. 1-4, wherein the peripheral side surface 16 extends in a thickness direction parallel to central axis C-C’), and the peripheral side surface includes a first cutting part (20/28/56) constituted of a first cutting edge (20) which is parallel with the central axis, and a first rake surface (56) and a first flank (i.e. upper portion of surface 28 adjacent to edge 20) which is adjacent to the first cutting edge (figs. 1-4, ¶ [0058] & [0063]-[0064]); a second cutting part constituted of a second cutting edge (22) which is mirror-image symmetric with the first cutting part with respect to the second symmetric surface and is parallel with the central axis (fig. 2, ¶ [0057]), and a second rake surface (58) and a second flank (i.e. lower portion of surface 28 adjacent to edge 22) which is adjacent to the second cutting edge (figs. 1-4, ¶ [0058] & [0063]-[0064]); a base end part (62) which is on the opposite side to a leading end part (18) where the first cutting part and the second cutting part are disposed (figs. 1-2, ¶ [0068], i.e. convex surface 62 of base portion 38).
Claim 1 also recites a third flat surface which continues from the first rake surface; a first flat surface which connects the third flat surface and one end of the base end part; a fourth flat surface which is mirror-image symmetric with the third flat surface with respect to the second symmetric surface and continues to the second rake surface; and a second flat surface which is mirror-image symmetric with the first flat surface with respect to the second symmetric surface and connects the fourth flat surface and the other end of the base end part. These limitations are met as illustrated in annotated fig. 1 of Schmidt, below.
PNG
media_image1.png
744
898
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As illustrated above, the third flat surface (i.e. portion 68 extending between first rake surface 56 and distal end 54 of base portion 38) extends from the first rake surface 56 to the first flat surface (which is a peripheral surface of the base portion 38 that extends from thinner third flat surface to the convex/base end 62 of the cutting insert). Likewise, given the symmetry about plane A-A’ (¶ [0057]), the fourth flat surface (i.e. portion extending between second rake surface 58 and distal end 54 of base portion 38) extends from the second rake surface 58 to the second flat surface (which is a peripheral surface of the base portion 38 that extends from thinner fourth flat surface to the convex/base end 62 of the cutting insert).
Schmidt is silent with respect to the structure of the tool body, thus fails to explicitly teach the tool body includes: an insert mounting seat which secures the cutting insert in an orientation in which the second flat surface is parallel with a longitudinal direction of the tool body, in a state where the first cutting part is usable; and a first discharge port which supplies coolant to the first cutting edge from the first rake surface side, in a state where the first cutting part is usable, and the first discharge port is disposed between the second flat surface and a first reference surface which is parallel with the second flat surface and includes an edge line of the first cutting edge. However, this would be obvious in view of Larsson.
Larsson is also directed to a turning tool 10having an indexable cutting insert (fig. 1A, ¶ [0004] & [0036]). Larsson teaches a head portion 13 of a tool holder/body that mounts the cutting insert 20 via a screw 18 that extends through a hole in the cutting insert (figs. 1A-1E, ¶ [0038] & [0040]). The cutting insert has first and second major faces with a peripheral side surface extending around the insert and connecting the first and second major faces (fig. 1A). The cutting insert is mounted in the tool holder so that a first end and/or second end of the peripheral side surface of the cutting insert is substantially parallel to a longitudinal axis of the tool holder (figs. 1A & 1E, ¶ [0041]). The tool holder of Larsson also has cooling means via coolant conveying member 29 extending along and over a major face of the insert so that a discharge port is adjacent/near the mounting through hole of the insert (figs. 1A, 1C, & 1D, ¶ [0058]-[0062]). The discharge port is configured to direct coolant towards the active cutting edge to cool the cutting edge/insert and remove chips generated by the cutting edge (fig. 1A, ¶ [0018] & [0060]).
In this case, each of Schmidt and Larsson is directed to a turning tool having an indexable cutting insert comprising two major sides/faces with a peripheral surface extending around the insert and connecting the major sides/faces, and having a mounting through hole extending from one major side/face to the other. While Schmidt is silent as to the structure of a cutting insert holder, Larsson teaches the tool body detailed above. Specifically, Larsson teaches that it is predictable to mount the cutting insert of Schmidt in a mounting seat via a screw so that at least one side of the peripheral surface (e.g. the second flat surface of Schmidt) is substantially parallel to the longitudinal direction of the tool body. Larsson also teaches that it is predictable for a coolant conveying member to extend along one of the major faces so that the discharge port is near the mounting through hole of the cutting insert and directs coolant towards the first/active cutting edge. Thus, in order to secure the cutting insert of Schmidt to a tool body to allow the insert to cut a workpiece, and allow the cutting edge to be cooled and generated chips to be removed, it would be obvious to mount the cutting insert of Schmidt on a seat of a tool body via a screw so that the second flat surface is parallel to the longitudinal direction of the tool body, and wherein a coolant conveying member extends along and over a major face so that the discharge port is near the mounting through hole of the cutting insert and directs coolant towards the first/active cutting edge.
Given the above modification, and as illustrated in annotated fig. 2 of Schmidt below, the discharge port is between the second flat surface and the first reference surface/plane, and the discharge port supplies coolant to the first cutting edge from the right side of the cutting edge, i.e. from the first rake surface 56 side.
PNG
media_image2.png
593
874
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Schmidt further teaches the third flat surface is inclined so as to be closer to the second flat surface in a direction toward the base end part, and the fourth flat surface, which is mirror-image symmetric with the third flat surface with respect to the second symmetric surface, is inclined so as to be closer to the first flat surface in the direction toward the base end part (see fig. 2, wherein the third and fourth flat surfaces incline towards axis A-A’ so that as they extend toward the base end part 62 they become closer to the second flat surface and first flat surface, respectively, at least with respect to the up and down direction illustrated in fig. 2.
Claim 4 recites the tool body further includes a second discharge port which supplies coolant from the first flank side to the first cutting edge, in the state where the first cutting part is usable, and the second discharge port is located closer to the base end side of the tool body than the second cutting edge. This would also be obvious in view of Larsson.
Larsson also teaches a second discharge port 34 below the cutting insert and configured to direct coolant to the active clearance surface (aka flank surface) of the cutting insert such that the coolant also travels towards the active cutting edge (figs. 1A & 1D, ¶ [0064]-[0065], wherein one of skill in the art appreciates that at least when a workpiece is present, the coolant will travel to the first cutting edge).
In this case, each of Schmidt et al. and Larsson are directed to a turning tool having an indexable cutting insert comprising two major sides/faces with a peripheral surface extending around the insert and connecting the major sides/faces, and having a mounting through hole extending from one major side/face to the other, and wherein a first discharge port directs coolant to the active cutting edge from above a major face of the cutting insert. Larsson teaches that it is known and predictable for the cutting tool to have a second discharge portion below a major face of the cutting insert that directs coolant to the flank surface of the cutting edge. Thus, in order to better cool the active cutting portion and better evacuate chips cut by the cutting edge, it would be obvious to provide a second discharge port below the cutting insert (i.e. closer to a base/bottom surface of the tool body) so that coolant is directed along at least a portion of the first flank and towards the first cutting edge.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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: the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest the tool of claim 1, wherein the locus of the coolant is approximately parallel with the third flat surface (wherein locus is interpreted as the travel path/line of the coolant from the first discharge port to the cutting edge).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kyle Cook whose telephone number is 571-272-2281. The examiner’s fax number is 571-273-3545. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner's supervisor Thomas Hong (571-272-0993). 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/KYLE A COOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
1 The following conventions are used in this office action. All direct quotations from claims are presented in italics. All information within non-italicized parentheses and presented with claim language are from or refer to the cited prior art reference unless explicitly stated otherwise.
2 In 103 rejections, when the primary reference is followed by “et al.”, “et al.” refers to the secondary references. For example, if Jones was modified by Smith and Johnson, subsequent recitations of “Jones et al.” mean “Jones in view of Smith and Johnson”.
3 Hereafter all uses of the word “obvious” should be construed to mean “obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.”