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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, claims 1-9, in the reply filed on 4/2/26 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “triple assembly”, “first drive assembly”, and “second drive assembly” in claim 1, “power output end” in claim 3, “cylinder” in claim 4, and “hinge joint”, “power output end”, and “hinge point”, in claim 6 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “73” in figure 1.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because figure 1 the illustration of the “second support plate” is incomplete; i.e. the top of the plate is missing.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3, 6, and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 6 set forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation, 37 CFR 1.75(i). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 needs an “and” after “exists;”.
Claims 3 and 8 need an “and” after “rail;”.
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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: “the first driving assembly” and “the second driving assembly” in claims 1 and 3.
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 § 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.
Claims 1-9 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 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 “triple assembly (2) comprises a welding head (21)”. It is unclear as to what a triple assembly is. Also, it is unclear if there are two more components for this assembly and what they are since the specification provides no other detail other than the triple assembly comprises a welding head. For the purposes of this examination, this limitation will be interpreted as a welding horn/head or a wedge-reed system.
Claim 6 recites the limitations “one end”, “the other end”, “the power output end”, “its hinge point”, and “the end”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
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 1-5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Su (CN 102700134 A).
Regarding claim 1, Su discloses:
An ultrasonic welding machine [ultrasonic spot welding machine; 0011 and figure 1], comprising
a machine frame (1) [frame (1)],
a triple assembly (2) [horn (4)],
a first driving assembly [cylinder (10)],
a welding seat (3) [jig (3)], and
a second driving assembly [cylinder (14)],
wherein the triple assembly (2) comprises a welding head (21) [tip of the horn], and the triple assembly (2) is movably set on the machine frame (1) so that the triple assembly (2) can move along a Z direction [0011-0012 and figure 1];
the first driving assembly is drivingly connected to the triple assembly (2), and the second driving assembly is drivingly connected to the welding seat (3) [0011-0012 and figure 1];
the ultrasonic welding machine is characterized in that [note that the following limitations are functional language],
the first driving assembly is configured to drive the triple assembly (2) to move to a preset position and a first working position;
the second driving assembly is configured to drive the welding seat (3) to move to a second working position to support the workpiece to be welded;
when the first driving assembly drives the triple assembly (2) to move to the preset position, and the second driving assembly drives the welding seat (3) to move to the second working position, a certain distance between the welding head and the workpiece to be welded still exists; [and]
when the first driving assembly drives the triple assembly (2) to move to the first working position, the welding head (21) of the triple assembly (2) abuts the workpiece to be welded.
Concerning any claimed results, materials, and/or functions:
Since the prior art apparatus, i.e. the apparatus based on the prior art reference above, is structurally identical to the claimed apparatus, it is the examiner’s position that the prior art apparatus is capable of achieving any claimed function with any claimed material to achieve any claimed result; such as moving to preset/working positions, abutting the workpiece, etc. This reasoning applies to any claim below where functional language, material worked upon, and/or a result is claimed.
Regarding claim 2, Su discloses:
wherein the first driving assembly is a multi-position cylinder (4) [cylinder (10) has at least a stopping position and a starting position and thus is multi-positional].
Regarding claim 3, Su discloses:
wherein the ultrasonic welding machine further comprises:
a first sliding rail [left guide (9)] disposed on the machine frame (1) and extending along the Z direction [see figure 1];
a first slider [portion of upper base (5) wrapped around guide (9)] slideably disposed on the first sliding rail;
a first support plate [plate of upper base(5)], set on the first slider,
wherein the triple assembly (2) is connected to the first support plate [see figure 1], and a power output end [end of piston (11)] of the first driving assembly is drivingly connected to the first support plate.
Regarding claim 4, Su discloses:
wherein the ultrasonic welding machine further comprises a base (6) [base (8)] on which the machine frame (1) is supported;
the second driving assembly is a cylinder [cylinder (14)], and the cylinder is movably set on the base (6) [see figure 1].
Regarding claim 5, Su discloses:
wherein the ultrasonic welding machine further comprises:
a transmission assembly (7) [rotating mechanism (7)] through which the welding seat (3) is drivingly connected to the second driving assembly.
Regarding claim 8, Su discloses:
wherein the ultrasonic welding machine further comprises:
a second sliding rail [right guide (9)] disposed on the machine frame (1) and extending along the Z-direction [see figure 1];
a second slider [portion of lower base (6) wrapped around guide (9)] slideably disposed on the second sliding rail;
a second support plate [plate of lower base (6)] disposed on the second slider,
wherein the welding seat (3) is connected to the second support plate [see figure 1].
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.
Claims 1-5, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su (CN 102700134 A) in view of Sonobond Ultrasonics “What Makes Sonobond’s Ultrasonic Welding System Outperform Competitors’ Systems When Welding Tin-Coated and Oxidized Wires and Terminals?”. The following applies should the applicant prove that Su does not teach a triple assembly.
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Su teaches:
An ultrasonic welding machine [ultrasonic spot welding machine; 0011 and figure 1], comprising
a machine frame (1) [frame (1)],
a first driving assembly [cylinder (10)],
a welding seat (3) [jig (3)], and
a second driving assembly [cylinder (14)],
wherein a welding head (21) [tip of the horn], and is movably set on the machine frame (1) so that the welding head (2) can move along a Z direction [0011-0012 and figure 1];
the first driving assembly is drivingly connected to the triple assembly (2), and the second driving assembly is drivingly connected to the welding seat (3) [0011-0012 and figure 1];
the ultrasonic welding machine is characterized in that [note that the following limitations are functional language],
the first driving assembly is configured to drive the triple assembly (2) to move to a preset position and a first working position;
the second driving assembly is configured to drive the welding seat (3) to move to a second working position to support the workpiece to be welded;
when the first driving assembly drives the triple assembly (2) to move to the preset position, and the second driving assembly drives the welding seat (3) to move to the second working position, a certain distance between the welding head and the workpiece to be welded still exists; [and]
when the first driving assembly drives the welding head (21) to move to the first working position, the welding head (21) abuts the workpiece to be welded.
Su does not teach:
a triple assembly (2);
wherein the triple assembly (2) comprises a welding head (21), and the triple assembly (2) is movably set on the machine frame (1) so that the triple assembly (2) can move along a Z direction; and
wherein the welding head (21) is a wedge-reed welding head.
Sonobond teaches the advantage of a wedge-reed system is that it uses a vertical, vibrating reed, driven by a wedge-shaped coupler and transducer assembly that’s perpendicular to the reed. With the line of static clamping force directly above the parts to be welded, high clamp force can be achieved without bending stress or stalling.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the Sonobond wedge-reed system into Su for at least the taught reason. Since applicant’s figure 1 appears to show that the triple assembly is the wedge-reed system then the prior art apparatus meets the triple assembly limitation.
Concerning any claimed results, materials, and/or functions:
Since the prior art apparatus, i.e. the apparatus based on the prior art reference above, is structurally identical to the claimed apparatus, it is the examiner’s position that the prior art apparatus is capable of achieving any claimed function with any claimed material to achieve any claimed result; such as moving to preset/working positions, abutting the workpiece, etc. This reasoning applies to any claim below where functional language, material worked upon, and/or a result is claimed.
Regarding claims 2-5 and 8, refer to the rejections of these claims above.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su (CN 102700134 A) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Sonobond Ultrasonics “What Makes Sonobond’s Ultrasonic Welding System Outperform Competitors’ Systems When Welding Tin-Coated and Oxidized Wires and Terminals?”.
Regarding claim 9, Su does not teach:
wherein the welding head (21) is a wedge-reed welding head.
Sonobond teaches the advantage of a wedge-reed system is that it uses a vertical, vibrating reed, driven by a wedge-shaped coupler and transducer assembly that’s perpendicular to the reed. With the line of static clamping force directly above the parts to be welded, high clamp force can be achieved without bending stress or stalling.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the Sonobond wedge-reed system into Su for at least the taught reason.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su (CN 102700134 A) or Su (CN 102700134 A) in view of Sonobond Ultrasonics “What Makes Sonobond’s Ultrasonic Welding System Outperform Competitors’ Systems When Welding Tin-Coated and Oxidized Wires and Terminals?” as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Zhou et al. (CN 112676692 A).
Regarding claim 6, Su does not teach:
wherein the transmission assembly (7) comprises a first connecting rod (71) and a second connecting rod (72),
one end of the second connecting rod (72) is pivotally connected to the base (6),
the other end of the second connecting rod (72) is pivotally connected to the first connecting rod (71), and
the power output end of the second driving assembly is drivingly connected to a hinge joint of the first connecting rod (71) and the second connecting rod (72), so as to allow the second connecting rod (72) to rotate around its hinge point with the base (6);
the end of the first connecting rod (71) which is not pivotally connected to the second connecting rod (72) is pivotally connected to the welding seat (3).
Zhou teaches an ultrasonic welding machine comprising supporting component (2), which travels vertically on guide rail (62), and driving component (3), which drives the supporting component via connecting rod structure (31) and driving part (32); wherein first and second connecting rods (311, 312) are pivotally connected to bottom plate (8) and the supporting component, respectively, and are connected to each other at a hinge, and wherein connecting part (323) is attached to the hinge and driven by cylinder (321) to move the connecting rod structure into a dead point position during welding in order to prevent the driving part from consuming the welding energy; abstract and figures 1 and 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the driving component into Su in order to prevent the driving part from consuming the welding energy or because it is a known lifting mechanism.
Regarding claim 7, Su does not teach:
wherein when the first connecting rod (71) and the second connecting rod (72) are aligned in a straight line without overlapping,
a connecting rod structure formed by the first connecting rod (71) and the second connecting rod (72) is in a dead point position, at this moment, the welding seat reaches the second working position.
However, this is addressed by the incorporation of Zhou in the rejection of claim 6.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure; see PTO 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS J GAMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5826. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 5712723458. 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.
/CARLOS J GAMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights