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 .
Response to Preliminary Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed 12/21/2023 has been entered. Claims 1-9 are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over PETTIGREW (US 3702740 A) in view of TASHIRO (JP 3648177 B2) and further in view of Matsuyama et al. (US 20180272488 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 8, PETTIGREW discloses a machine tool (20) and method for controlling the machine (control panel/electrical tachometer 119, control switches, control diagram fig. 19), the machine tool comprising: a cover body (column 24/base section 28 and/or reinforcing web structure 467, (col. 5, lines 31-75, col. 12, lines 22-75, col. 13, lines 1-62, figs. 1-7 and 12-15) for defining a processing area; an ejection part (316) for ejecting a coolant into the processing area;
a first tank (30) for receiving the coolant ejected into the processing area;
a second tank (280) for storing the coolant to be supplied to the
ejection part; a second detector (float switches 318, 320, and 322) for detecting a second coolant amount that is an amount of coolant in the second tank; a pump (304) for feeding the coolant from the first tank to the second tank; and
a control unit (41/switch box 42) that controls the machine tool,
wherein control modes of the pump include: a first control mode in which the pump is driven when the first coolant amount is more than a first predetermined amount and the pump is stopped when the first coolant
amount is less than a second predetermined amount that is smaller than the first predetermined amount (closed/stopped if the fluid level in tank 280 is above float switch 318); and a second control mode in which the pump is driven in such a manner that the first coolant amount is a constant amount, and the control unit controls the pump in the first control mode when the second coolant amount is more than or equal to a third predetermined amount, and switches the control mode of the pump from the first control mode to the second control mode (switches 320 and 322) in response to the second coolant amount falling below the third predetermined amount (amounts determined via float switches 318, 320, and 322 (col. 13, lines 65- col. 16 line 65, claims 1-5, and 17, figs. 1-7 and 12-15).
PETTIGREW fails to disclose a first detector for detecting a first coolant amount that is an amount of coolant in the first tank and if argued that PETTIGREW fails to disclose the control unit controls the pump to be driven when detected coolant amount is more than a first predetermined amount, stop smaller than the first predetermined amount, and if reaches more than or equal to a third a third amount return to the first mode/detect first amount and is driven at a constant amount-
TASHIRO teaches having a first and second cooling tank (1b/52) with a first and second detector (29/54) for detecting a first and second coolant amount that is an amount of coolant in the first tank and second tank respectively ([0019-0020], figs. 1-4).
Matsuyama et al. teaches having two cooling devices (shower coolant device and base coolant device) with a control unit that controls the injection amount of the coolant in the shower coolant device and the base coolant device with a “liquid level detection unit detects that a liquid level of the coolant inside the cover body is equal to or greater than a prescribed liquid level” and controlling the amount of coolant inside a cover body/tank [0115-0117].
Given the teachings of PETTIGREW to have a plurality of coolant tank sensors to detect an amount of coolant in the tank, control valve with pumps and a controller that controls the pump to be driven when a detected coolant amount is at a predetermined amount, it 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 to modify the detectors with having an additional detector for detecting a first coolant amount that is an amount of coolant in the first tank(pan) and the control unit to control the pump(s) to be driven when detected coolant amount is more than a first predetermined amount, stop smaller than the first predetermined amount, and if reaches more than or equal to a third a third amount return to the first mode/detect first amount and is driven at a constant amount to have precise adjustment of cooling fluid applied, avoid dangerous low levels of fluid, and/or for fluid rate control purposes as taught by TASHIRO and Matsuyama et al.
Regarding claim 4, PETTIGREW discloses a light sources indicator lights (516, 524, 528, and 530), wherein the control unit causes the light source (530) to emit light in a first light emission pattern when the control mode of the pump is the first control mode (a red emergency indicator light 528 – level too low), and causes the light source to emit light in a second light emission pattern that is different from the first light emission pattern when the control mode of the pump is the second control mode (blue – sump on, col. 15 lines 15-54, fig. 19).
Regarding claim 5, PETTIGREW discloses the pump (304) includes an intake port for sucking the coolant (port shown fig. 12), the intake port is covered by the coolant when the amount of coolant in the first tank is the first predetermined amount, and the intake port is not covered by the coolant when the amount of coolant in the first tank is the second predetermined amount (port is covered by the coolant up to about half the tank/pan as shown in fig. 12 and will not be covered when gets too low/second predetermined amount).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over PETTIGREW (US 3702740 A) in view of Urban (US 20130001175 A1) in view of Matsuyama et al. (US 20180272488 A1) and further in view of Matsuyama et al. (US 20180272488 A1).
Regarding claim 9, PETTIGREW discloses a machine tool (20), the machine tool comprising: a cover body (column 24/base section 28 and/or reinforcing web structure 467, (col. 5, lines 31-75, col. 12, lines 22-75, col. 13, lines 1-62, figs. 1-7 and 12-15) for defining a processing area; an ejection part (316) for ejecting a coolant into the processing area;
a first tank (30) for receiving the coolant ejected into the processing area;
a second tank (280) for storing the coolant to be supplied to the
ejection part; a second detector (float switches 318, 320, and 322) for detecting a second coolant amount that is an amount of coolant in the second tank; a pump (304) for feeding the coolant from the first tank to the second tank; and
a control unit (41/switch box 42) that controls the machine tool,
wherein control modes of the pump include: a first control mode in which the pump is driven when the first coolant amount is more than a first predetermined amount and the pump is stopped when the first coolant
amount is less than a second predetermined amount that is smaller than the first predetermined amount (closed if the fluid level in tank 280 is above float switch 318); and a second control mode in which the pump is driven in such a manner that the first coolant amount is a constant amount, and the control unit controls the pump in the first control mode when the second coolant amount is more than or equal to a third predetermined amount, and switches the control mode of the pump from the first control mode to the second control mode (switches 320 and 322) in response to the second coolant amount falling below the third predetermined amount (amounts determined via float switches 318, 320, and 322 (col. 13, lines 65- col. 16 line 65, claims 1-5, and 17, figs. 1-7 and 12-15). PETTIGREW also discloses automated control mechanisms/switches (control panel/electrical tachometer 119, control switches, control diagram fig. 19).
PETTIGREW fails to disclose a non-transitory recording medium storing a program for controlling the machine, a first detector for detecting a first coolant amount that is an amount of coolant in the first tank and if argued that PETTIGREW fails to disclose the control unit controls the pump to be driven when detected coolant amount is more than a first predetermined amount, stop smaller than the first predetermined amount, and if reaches more than or equal to a third a third amount return to the first mode/detect first amount and is driven at a constant amount-
Urban teaches metal working machines/CNC (12) with cooling filtration system (10) having a first and second cooling tank (34/38) with a first and second detector (40/48) for detecting a first and second coolant amount that is an amount of coolant in the first tank and second tank respectively [0010-0011], with pumps (62/64) and control panel (70) that reads inputs from the level sensors (40/48) to control the pumps ([0010-0022], fig. 1).
Matsuyama et al. teaches having two cooling devices (shower coolant device and base coolant device) with a control unit that controls the injection amount of the coolant in the shower coolant device and the base coolant device with a “liquid level detection unit detects that a liquid level of the coolant inside the cover body is equal to or greater than a prescribed liquid level” and controlling the amount of coolant inside a cover body/tank [0115-0117].
HOSHINO also teaches a machine tool (20) having a controller (1) with a non-transitory recording medium storing a program for controlling the machine (software program [0012-0014, 0027, 0068], claims 1-3) fluid level sensor (4) and teaches the controller controls a pump (14) to be driven when detected coolant amount needs to be adjusted ([0024-0028], figs. 1-2)
Given the teachings of PETTIGREW to have a plurality of coolant tank sensors to detect an amount of coolant in the tank, control valve with pumps and a controller that controls the pump to be driven when a detected coolant amount is at a predetermined amount along with automated control mechanisms/switches, it 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 to modify the detectors with having an additional detector for detecting a first coolant amount that is an amount of coolant in the first tank (pan) and the control unit with having a non-transitory recording medium storing a program such as CNC for controlling the machine to control the pump(s) to be driven when detected coolant amount is more than a first predetermined amount, stop smaller than the first predetermined amount, and if reaches more than or equal to a third a third amount return to the first mode/detect first amount and is driven at a constant amount to have precise adjustment of cooling fluid applied, avoid dangerous low levels of fluid, and/or for fluid rate control purposes as taught by Urban, Matsuyama et al. and Matsuyama et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 and 6-7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Reasons for Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious machine tool with chip conveyor comprising all the structural and functional limitations and further comprising, amongst other limitations/features, coolant an ejection part, a first tank, a second tank, a pump, and a control unit with control modes of the pump include: a first control mode in which the pump is driven when a first coolant amount in the first tank is more than a first predetermined amount and the pump is stopped when the first coolant amount is less than a second predetermined amount; and a second control mode in which the pump is driven so that the first coolant amount is a constant amount and controls the pump in first control mode when a second coolant amount in the second tank is more than or equal to a third predetermined amount, and switches the control mode of the pump from the first control mode to the second control mode when the second coolant amount is less than the third predetermined amount, wherein the control unit stops the machine tool when the second coolant amount is less than a fourth predetermined amount that is smaller than the third predetermined amount. Though PETTIGREW teaches having coolant tank sensors to detect an amount of coolant in the tank the constant amount is not obtained and it would not be obvious to modify the controller to provide a constant amount by monitoring both tanks at different coolant levels with different predetermined coolant amounts. Having the efficiency coolant supplied and the coolant amount remains a constant amount and safety shutdown where the control unit stops the machine tool if the coolant reaches an imbalance, too low provides an effective safe cooling system.
While various features of the claimed subject matter are found individually in the prior art, a skilled artisan would have to include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed subject matter, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Additional prior art considered pertinent: JP 2002143612 A - coolant purifying apparatus with level detecting unit see form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT LONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm, 8-9pm (EST).
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, SHELLEY SELF can be reached at (571) 272-4524. 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.
/ROBERT F LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731