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 Interpretation
2. 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.
Upright Translation Means (3) is being interpreted as structurally requiring a first pair of upright translation members (31) fixed to a bench (20) and a second pair of upright translation members (32) fixed to a rear support (22) [as described in paragraph 0029-0030 of the specification of the instant application], or an equivalents thereof.
Carriage Translation Means (5) is being interpreted as structurally requiring a first ball screw (5’) and a second ball screw (5’’) [as described in paragraph 0033-0036 of the specification of the instant application], or an equivalents thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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 1-20 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.
Regarding claim 1 and 19, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claims 2-20 are rejected as a result of being dependent on a rejected claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected, as best understood in view of the above 112 rejection, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ex-Cell-O GMBH (DE 20 2007 013009 U1 and the Machine Translation thereof) in view of Repossini et al. (US 2018/0099367).
Regarding to claim 1, Ex-Cell-O GMBH discloses a machine tool (machine tool 210, as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) suitable to machine semi-finished aluminum alloy or titanium alloy products and designed to rest on a horizontal reference plane, for example a ground plane [as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH], said machine tool (210) comprising: a supporting structure (machine stand 16, as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) comprising a bench (horizontally extending and projecting portions located at first and second 60, as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) having a main extension along a longitudinal direction (slide feed axis 50, as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH), and a rear support (a rear support surface of 16, as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) extending both along the longitudinal direction (50) and along a vertical direction (additional slide feed axis 80, as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH), wherein the bench and the rear support are rigidly connected to each other [as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH], and wherein the supporting structure (16) is provided with upright translation means (slide drive device 60, as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH and as invoked by 112(f) having the corresponding structure indicated above) oriented according to the longitudinal direction; an upright (carriage 48, as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) connected to the supporting structure (16) by means-of the upright translation means (60) so as to translate along the longitudinal direction[as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH], said upright (48) comprising carriage translation means (drive device 90, as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH, and as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) oriented according to the vertical direction; a carriage (additional carriage 78, as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) connected to the upright by means-of the carriage translation means so as to be translatable along the vertical direction [as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH]; and a working head (tool holder 82, as described in paragraph 0057 of the Machine Translation and can be seen from Figures 1 and 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) engaged with the carriage (78) and having a tool holder seat suitable to house a tool for chip removal machining [as described in paragraph 0057 of the Machine Translation and can be seen from Figures 1 and 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH].
Ex-Cell-O GMBH discloses the machine tool (210) comprises motors (motors of 30, 60, 66, 90, 96, as described in paragraph 0063 and 0068 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH). However, Ex-Cell-O GMBH does not explicitly disclose having a first pair of carriage moving ratio motors and a second pair of carriage moving ratio motors, and wherein said first and second pairs of carriage moving ratio motors are positioned aboard the upright and engaged to the carriage translation means. Repossini et al., however, discloses a machine tool having a first and second pair of motors (a first and second pair of electric motors 23 interacting with each respective guide 12, as described in paragraph 0037 and can be seen from Figure 1 in Repossini et al.) positioned aboard an upright (17) and engaged to a carriage translation means [as described in paragraph 0037 and can be seen from Figures 1-4 in Repossini et al.]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motors in the machine tool disclosed by Ex-Cell-O GMBH, to include a first and second pair of carriage moving ratio motors, as taught by Repossini et al., as a simple substitution of one known motor configuration for another, which would yield predictable results.
Regarding to claim 2, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 1 wherein the carriage translation means (90) comprise a first ball screw and a second ball screw [as described in paragraph 0005 and 0063, and can be seen from Figure 1 and 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH].
10. Regarding to claim 3, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 2, having a first and second ball screw [as described in paragraph 0005 and 0063 and can be seen from Figures 1-6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH]. Repossini, further discloses a first and second pair of motors (a first and second pair of electric motors 23 interacting with each respective guide 12, as described in paragraph 0037 and can be seen from Figure 1 in Repossini et al.). However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini does not explicitly disclose the first ball screw being actuated by the first pair of carriage moving ratio motors and the second ball screw being actuated by the second pair of carriage moving ratio motors. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini to include the first ball screw being actuated by the first pair of motors and the second ball screw being actuated by the second pair of motors, as a known driving technique applied to a known devices ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Regarding to claim 4, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 2, having a first and second ball screw [as described in paragraph 0005 and 0063 and can be seen from Figures 1-6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH]. However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini does not explicitly disclose the first ball screw being provided with a first nut and the second ball screw provided with a second nut, the first and second nuts respectively connected to opposite sides of the carriage. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a first and second ball screw having a first and second nut connected to opposite sides of the carriage, as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding to claim 5, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 1. Repossini further discloses the first pair of carriage moving ratio motors (23) comprises a first pair of electric motors and a second pair of electric motors [first and second pair of electric motors 23 interacting with each respective guide 12, as described in paragraph 0037 and can be seen from Figure 1 in Repossini et al.]. However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini does not explicitly disclose having and a first gearbox, first moving shaft, second gearbox and second moving shaft. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motor in the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini to include each electric motor of said first pair of electric motors provided with a first moving shaft that engages the first gearbox, and the second pair of carriage moving ratio motors comprises a second pair of electric motors and a second gearbox, and wherein each electric motor of said second pair of electric motors is provided with a second moving shaft that engages the second gearbox, as a simple substitution of a known motor for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding to claim 6, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 1. Repossini further discloses having motor (23, as described in paragraph 0037 and can be seen from Figure 1 in Repossini et al.). However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini does not explicitly disclose the motors comprising a main electric motor and the other three electric motors being slaves. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motor in the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini to include a main electric motor and the other three electric motors being slaves, as a simple substitution of a known motor configuration for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding to claim 7, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 1,wherein the upright (48 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) comprises a pair of vertical guides on which the carriage (78 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) slides [as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH].
Regarding to claim 8, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 1. However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini does not explicitly disclose having a vertical position transducer for detecting a position of the carriage with respect to the upright. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus disclosed by the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini to include a vertical position transducer, as a known technique applied to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Regarding to claim 9, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 1. Repossini further discloses a first and second pair of motors (a first and second pair of electric motors 23 interacting with each respective guide 12, as described in paragraph 0037 and can be seen from Figure 1 in Repossini et al.) positioned aboard an upright (17) and engaged with the upright translation means. However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini does not explicitly disclose having four pairs of ratio motors. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus disclosed by the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini to include a plurality of motors, including the instance of having four pairs of motors, as a mere duplication of parts.
17. Regarding to claim 10, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 9, wherein the upright translation means (60) comprise a first pair of upright translation members fixed to the bench and a second pair of upright translation members fixed to the rear support [as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH].
Regarding to claim 11, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 10, wherein a first pair of ratio motors and a second pair of ratio motors (23 in Repossini) of said four pairs of ratio motors engage the first pair of upright translation members and wherein a third pair of ratio motors and a fourth pair of ratio motors of said four pairs of ratio motors engage the second pair of upright translation members [as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O and as described in paragraph 0037 and can be seen from Figure 1 in Repossini et al.].
19. Regarding to claim 12, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 11, having a first pair of motors (23 in Repossini) on a first side and a second pair of motors on an opposite side of an upright. However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini does not explicit disclose the first pair of ratio motors and the third pair of ratio motors are positioned on a first side of the upright and wherein the second pair of ratio motors and the fourth pair of ratio motors are positioned on a second side of the upright, opposite to the first side. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus disclosed by the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini to include a plurality of motors added to each side, as a mere duplication of parts and well known substitution which would yield predictable results.
20. Regarding to claim 13, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 12. Repossini further discloses having motor (23, as described in paragraph 0037 and can be seen from Figure 1 in Repossini et al.). However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini does not explicitly disclose the motors comprising a main electric, wherein a first main ratio motor belonging to the first or third pair of ratio motors is a master and the remaining three ratio motors of the first and third pairs of ratio motors are slaves, and wherein a second main ratio motor belonging to the second or fourth pair of ratio motors is a master and the remaining three ratio motors of the second and fourth pairs of ratio motors are slaves. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motor in the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini to include a main electric motor and the other three electric motors being slaves, including the instance when a first main ratio motor belonging to the first or third pair of ratio motors is a master and the remaining three ratio motors of the first and third pairs of ratio motors are slaves, and wherein a second main ratio motor belonging to the second or fourth pair of ratio motors is a master and the remaining three ratio motors of the second and fourth pairs of ratio motors are slaves, as a simple substitution of a known motor configuration for another to obtain predictable results.
21. Regarding to claim 14, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 10, wherein each upright translation member of the first and second pairs of upright translation members is a rack [Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O]. However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini does not explicitly disclose each ratio motor of the four pairs of ratio motors comprises an upright translation electric motor, having a motor axis parallel to the vertical direction and a gearbox having an inlet engaged with the upright translation electric motor, and an outlet engaged with the rack. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motor in the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini to include each ratio motor of the four pairs of ratio motors comprises an upright translation electric motor, having a motor axis parallel to the vertical direction and a gearbox having an inlet engaged with the upright translation electric motor, and an outlet engaged with the rack, as a simple substitution of a known motor for another to obtain predictable results.
22. Regarding to claim 15, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 6, having motors. However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini does not explicitly disclose having a gantry control provided between the master and the slaves. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a gantry control for controlling the motors provided between the master and the slaves, as a known technique applied to a known device ready for improvement and which would yield predictable results.
23. Regarding to claim 16, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) of claim 1, wherein the working head (82 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) is rotatable about a pitching axis and a rolling axis [as can be seen from Figure 1 and 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Figure 2 in Repossini].
24. Regarding to claim 17, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 10, wherein the bench further comprises a first pair of guides (guides located at a lower 60, Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) on which the upright slides (48) [Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH], and wherein the rear support (rear support surface of 16) extends between a lower end connected to the bench, and an upper end, the second pair of upright translation members and a second guide on which the upright slides being positioned at said upper end [as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH].
25. Regarding to claim 18, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) according to claim 17, wherein at least a third guide (guide located at an upper 60, Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH) fixed to the rear support (a rear support surface of 16) and on which the upright (48) slides is positioned between the upper end and the lower end [as can be seen from Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH].
26. Regarding to claim 19, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of claim 10, wherein both the first pair of upright translation members and the second pair of upright translation members extend along the longitudinal direction between a first end and a second end opposite to the first end [Figure 6 in Ex-Cell-O GMBH]. However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini does not explicitly disclose having a vertical position transducer for detecting a position of the carriage with respect to the upright. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus disclosed by the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH and Repossini to include a vertical position transducer, as a known technique applied to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
27. Regarding to claim 20, Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini discloses the machine tool (210) of having motors. However, the combination of Ex-Cell-O GMBH modified by Repossini does not explicitly disclose having a gantry control provided between the master and the slaves. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a gantry control for controlling the motors provided between the master and the slaves, as a known technique applied to a known device ready for improvement and which would yield predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIRVANA DEONAUTH whose telephone number is (571)270-5949. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at 5712720993. 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.
/NIRVANA DEONAUTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights