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 .
Status of Claims/Response to Amendment
Claims 16-26 and 19-30 are pending and Claims 1-15 and 27-28 are canceled in response to the claim amendments filed on May 6, 2026. The claim amendments overcame all prior objections and 102 rejections as presented in the Office Action mailed on 02/06/2026. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of objection and rejection are made as follows.
Claim Objections
Claim 29 is objected to because of the following informality: acronym “CNC” and “CAM” at first instance (at line 3) should be fully spelled out.
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.
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 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 16-17, 20-23, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SCHNEIDER (US-2009/0198366-A1) in view of Tarnofsky et al. (WO-2020043723-A1).
With respect to claims 16 and 29, SCHNEIDER (US-2009/0198366-A1) teaches a method controlling a manufacturing machine with a Computerized Numerical Control (CNC) control system1 for manufacturing a workpiece (NC system of fig. 1 for operating a machine tool to manufacture a workpiece, [0033]), the method comprising:
providing workpiece data to the CNC control system (NC system of fig.1 models the workpiece using a CAD system 1, [0033]);
providing Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM) software to the CNC control system (NC system of fig.1 includes a CAM system 3, [0033]);
generating program instructions with the CNC control system by the CAM software in accordance with the workpiece data for manufacturing the workpiece by the manufacturing machine (the CAM system 3 determines the milling paths from the geometry-related data of the workpiece to be produced and the later configuration of the machine tool, as well as from the geometry-related data of a blank which forms the starting part for the later machining operation by the machine tool, wherein these milling paths have to be traversed by the machine axes of the machine tool to manufacture the workpiece to be produced from the blank… the movements of the machine axes required to manufacture the workpiece are determined by the CAM system 3, [0033]; NC system of fig.1 includes a postprocessor 5 to generate an NC parts program 24, [0034]);
encrypting the program instructions with the CNC control system and saving of the encrypted program instructions in the CNC control system (NC parts program 24 is stored in an encrypted form in the simulation unit 7 of the NC system, fig.3 and [0039]);
reading out the encrypted program instructions from the non-volatile memory with the CNC control system (NC system of fig. 1 includes a control device 9 of the machine tool reads in the NC parts program to control the machining operation of the machine tool, in order to manufacture the workpiece from the blank, [0034-0036]);
decrypting the encrypted program instructions with the CNC control system (the control device 9 decrypts the simulated configuration 18 stored in the parts program 24, [0039]); and
processing of the decrypted program instructions with the CNC control system for controlling the manufacturing machine for manufacturing the workpiece (NC system of fig.1 initiate machining operation to manufacture the workpiece, fig.2 and [0033-0034]).
With respect to claims 16 and 29, SCHNEIDER teaches encrypting the program instructions with the CNC control system and saving of the encrypted program instructions in the CNC control system (SCHNEIDER: NC parts program 24 is stored in an encrypted form in the simulation unit 7 of the NC system, fig.3 and [0039]) but fails to teach saving the program instructions in a non-volatile memory. However, it is known by Tarnofsky to teach of a CNC control including a non-volatile memory for storing a machining program that controls a manufacturing of a workpiece (Tarnofsky: numerical controlled system of fig.1 and fig.2 including a data storage device 330 of a flash memory, p.7).
Because Tarnofsky’s teaching is also directed to a CNC control system (Tarnofsky: figs.102; SCHNEIDER: fig.1), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teaching of a non-volatile memory to store the machine program as taught by Tarnofsky’s with the CNC control system as taught by SCHNEIDER for its ability to permanently retain stored data even when the device is powered off.
With respect to claims 17, SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky combined teaches wherein the program instructions form individual sets or blocks of a plurality of sets of a parts program for manufacturing the workpiece (Tarnofsky: the machining data can only be simulated in blocks on the machine tool simulation application 502, page 12).
With respect to claims 20, SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky combined teaches wherein the program instructions are decrypted in accordance with metadata associated with the program instructions (Tarnofsky: the NC program or the NC code of the machining data, the following data can be encrypted as required: Images and / or 3D models e.g. with regard to a specified clamping situation of the tool and / or workpiece, raw part information (e.g. images, 3D models, geometry information, material information, and/or size information), data on the tools or tool data used, data on specified zero points, CAD data of the finished part to be manufactured (e.g. pictures and / or 3D models) and / or other graphics, sketches, 2D drawings, 3D models, texts or documents, p.9).
With respect to claim 21, SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky combined teaches wherein the decryption of the program instructions is restricted to a particular numerical control facility and/or a particular manufacturing machine and/or a particular license (Tarnofsky: the execution data preferably also specifying the authentication specification…indicate a permissible machine tool type or a permissible machine tool, pages 5 and 11).
With respect to claim 22, SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky combined teaches wherein a key is used for encryption and decryption of the program instructions (Tarnofsky: encryption key…can be obtained…from server 400 of area C, page 10).
With respect to claim 23, SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky combined teaches wherein a first key is used for encryption (Tarnofsky: the encryption key data K2 can be assigned to the machine data M2 and the encryption key data K3 can be assigned to the machine data M3, page 7) and a second key for decryption of the program instructions (a private key or encryption key on the storage medium 330 (step S402 results in YES), then the execution data is decrypted in step, page 11).
With respect to claim 30, SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky combined teaches wherein the numerical control facility comprises a CNC control system and the manufacturing system comprises a machine tool (Tarnofsky: method and system for providing processing of a workpiece on a numerically controlled machine tool 100, abstract and figs.1-2).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SCHNEIDER (US-2009/0198366-A1) in view of Tarnofsky et al. (WO-2020043723-A1) and further in view of Wang et al. (CN-102087515-B).
With respect to claim 18/16, SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky combined teaches wherein the encrypted program instructions are decrypted in a NC kernel of the numerical control facility (Tarnofsky: the NC code of the machining program can be decrypted on the graphical user interface of the control panel {of the NC machine tool 100}…the decryption of the NC code is only carried out by the NC code execution system directly when the machining program is executed…decrypted NC code or decrypted machining data on the data processing device 300 of the machine tool, page 8). But SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky fails to state the obvious that the numerical control facility includes a NC kernel.
However, it is known by Wang to teach that the numerical control facility includes a NC kernel (Wang: CNC kernel 121, page 4).
Because Wang’s teaching is also directed to a method and a manufacturing machine system for operating a numerical control facility for controlling a manufacturing machine for manufacturing a workpiece and the manufacturing machine system (Wang: fig.1; Tarnofsky: method and system for providing processing of a workpiece on a numerically controlled machine tool 100, abstract and figs.1-2; and SCHNEIDER: fig.1), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching that the numerical control facility includes a NC kernel as taught by Wang with the method and system for controlling a manufacturing machine as taught by SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky for the purpose of realizing interpolation calculating and motion control (Wang: page 4).
With respect to claim 19/16, SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky combined teaches wherein the decrypted program instructions are only made available in a volatile memory of the numerical control facility (Tarnofsky: the encrypted execution data comprising the processing data and/or the execution data with encrypted processing data provided and/or transmitted via the network 700 to the area C, S307 and page 10; area C as taught in fig.2 includes the machine tools 100, NC control 200, and data processing device 300, fig.1 teaches the data processing device 300 includes data storage device 330 with hard disk and/or a flash memory, figs.1-2 and page 6; data processing device 300 set up to read, process and execute NC data of a machining program, in particular by executing the NC program and executing commands specified in the NC program, commands given in the NC program for execution to the To transmit NC control 211 and / or the PLC control 212 or, based on the commands specified in the NC program, to transmit corresponding control commands or signals for execution to the NC control 211 and / or the PLC control 212, page 7, thus area C is interpreted as the components of the numerical control facility). But SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky combined fails to state the obvious that the numerical control facility includes a NC kernel.
However, it is known by Wang to teach that the numerical control facility includes a NC kernel (Wang: CNC kernel 121, page 4).
Because Wang’s teaching is also directed to a method and a manufacturing machine system for operating a numerical control facility for controlling a manufacturing machine for manufacturing a workpiece and the manufacturing machine system (Wang: fig.1; Tarnofsky: method and system for providing processing of a workpiece on a numerically controlled machine tool 100, abstract and figs.1-2; and SCHNEIDER: fig.1), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching that the numerical control facility includes a NC kernel as taught by Wang with the method and system for controlling a manufacturing machine as taught by SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky for the purpose of realizing interpolation calculating and motion control (Wang: page 4).
Claim 24/16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SCHNEIDER (US-2009/0198366-A1) in view of Tarnofsky et al. (WO-2020043723-A1) and further in view of Wu et al. (“A flexible and lightweight user-demand DRM system for multimedia contents over multiple portable device platforms”, Softw. Pract. Exper., 2017, P.1417-1441).
With respect to claim 24, SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky combined does not appear to teach wherein encryption and decryption takes place using OpenSSL software.
However, it is known by Wu to teach of an encryption and decryption system that takes place using Open SSL software (Wu: figure 20 and p.1430-1432).
Because Wu’s teaching is also directed to an teach of an encryption and decryption system (Wu: figure 20; Tarnofsky: figs.1-2; and SCHNEIDER: fig.1), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of an Open SSL software as taught by Wu with the encryption and decryption system of SCHNEIDER and Tarnofsky for a well-known purpose of providing the foundational libraries for secure communication over networks, making it an indispensable part of modern internet security.
Claims 25/18/16 and 26/18/16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SCHNEIDER (US-2009/0198366-A1) in view of Tarnofsky et al. (WO-2020043723-A1), in view of Wang et al. (CN-102087515-B), and further in view of Wu et al. (“A flexible and lightweight user-demand DRM system for multimedia contents over multiple portable device platforms”, Softw. Pract. Exper., 2017, P.1417-1441).
With respect to claims 25-26, SCHNEIDER, Tarnofsky and Wang combined teaches wherein the NC kernel manages access rights, accesses the encrypted program instructions, and decrypts and processes the encrypted program instructions only after successful authentication (Wang: CNC kernel 121, page 4; Tarnofsky: the encrypted execution data comprising the processing data and/or the execution data with encrypted processing data provided and/or transmitted via the network 700 to the area C, S307 and page 10; the NC code of the machining program can be decrypted on the graphical user interface of the control panel {of the NC machine tool 100}…the decryption of the NC code is only carried out by the NC code execution system directly when the machining program is executed…decrypted NC code or decrypted machining data on the data processing device 300 of the machine tool, page 8; the execution data preferably also specifying the authentication specification…indicate a permissible machine tool type or a permissible machine tool, pages 5 and 11). But SCHNEIDER, Tarnofsky and Wang combined does not appear to teach controlling the access and usage of the program instructions by the DRM library.
However, it is known by Wu to teach of an encryption and decryption system (Wu: figure 20 and p.1430-1432) that controls access to content via DRM library (Wu: a secure DRM system with a design based on user demands, where a consumer can access contents only on authenticated devices until the authorization expires, p.1417,1422, and 1428-1430).
Because Wu’s teaching is also directed to an teach of an encryption and decryption system (Wu: figure 20; Wang: fig.1; Tarnofsky: figs.1-2; and SCHNEIDER: fig.1), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of a DRM library as taught by Wu with the encryption and decryption system of SCHNEIDER, Tarnofsky and Wang for a well-known purpose of providing the foundational libraries for secure communication over networks, making it an indispensable part of modern internet security.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HIEN (CINDY) D KHUU whose telephone number is (571)272-8585. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8a-8p.
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, Ken Lo can be reached on 571-272-9774. 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.
/HIEN D KHUU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116 July 2, 2026
1 The broadest reasonable interpretation of “A CNC control system” is a collection of interacting, interrelated, or interdependent parts working together to achieve a shared goal.
Prosecution Insights