Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is responsive to the communications filed 8/30/2023. As per the claims filed 8/30/2023:
Claims 1-2 are pending.
Claim(s) 1 is/are independent claim(s).
Note Regarding Prior Art
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Note Regarding AIA Status
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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: A fluctuation command calculation unit, a speed control unit in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hiroshi Fujimoto et al (US Pg Pub No. 2015/0160643; Published: 06/11/2015)(hereinafter: Fujimoto).
Claim 1:
As per independent claim 1, Fujimoto discloses a control device for a machine tool, comprising:
a fluctuation command calculation unit configured to calculate a fluctuation command based on a speed command for a main spindle motor of the machine tool and a fluctuation condition for causing a rotation speed of the main spindle motor to periodically fluctuate [[0049] First of all, the value of vibration occurring on the tool 8 when machining is performed using the machine tool 1 while the rotational speed of the spindle 6 is varied at a predetermined variation amplitude 2.times.N.sub.A [rad/s] and a predetermined variation period T [s] with respect to a predetermined target rotational speed (average rotational speed) N.sub.0 [rad/s] as shown in FIG. 2 is obtained in advance using the variation amplitude and the variation period as variables. Then, correlation data indicative of correlation between a speed variation rate RVA of the spindle rotational speed, a speed variation period ratio RVF of the spindle rotational speed, and the vibration occurring on the tool 8 is obtained]. Variation refers to fluctuation. and
a speed control unit configured to control the rotation speed of the main spindle motor based on the speed command and the fluctuation command, the fluctuation command calculation unit being configured to calculate the fluctuation command by calculating a frequency of the rotation speed that periodically fluctuates of the main spindle motor based on the rotation speed of the main spindle motor based on the speed command and a frequency rate that is the fluctuation condition [[0061] Subsequently, based on the set speed variation rate RVA and speed variation period ratio RVF, the variation amplitude N.sub.A and the variation period T of the spindle rotational speed are determined. Then, under control by the controller 10, the spindle 6 is rotated so that the rotational speed thereof varies at the determined variation amplitude N.sub.A and variation period T with respect to the average (target) rotational speed N.sub.0, thereby machining the workpiece W. [0066] FIG. 11 depicts the frequency components of the acceleration (vibration) of the tool 8 during the period in which the rotational speed is periodically varied, and FIG. 12 depicts the frequency components of the acceleration (vibration) of the tool 8 during the period in which the rotational speed is fixed to the constant speed. As seen from FIGS. 11 and 12, self-excited chatter vibration of the tool 8 can be suppressed by periodically varying the rotational speed of the spindle 6 so that the speed variation rate RVA is 0.3 and the speed variation period ratio RVF is 0.01.].
Claim 2:
As per claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Fujimoto discloses wherein the fluctuation command calculation unit is configured to calculate the fluctuation command by calculating an amplitude of the rotation speed that periodically fluctuates of the main spindle motor based on the rotation speed of the main spindle motor based on the speed command and an amplitude rate that is the fluctuation condition [[0058]… [0061] Subsequently, based on the set speed variation rate RVA and speed variation period ratio RVF, the variation amplitude N.sub.A and the variation period T of the spindle rotational speed are determined. Then, under control by the controller 10, the spindle 6 is rotated so that the rotational speed thereof varies at the determined variation amplitude N.sub.A and variation period T with respect to the average (target) rotational speed N.sub.0, thereby machining the workpiece W. It is noted that the variation amplitude N.sub.A and the variation period T can be calculated]
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOWARD CORTES whose telephone number is (571)270-1383. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott T Baderman can be reached on (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 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HOWARD CORTES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118