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 .
This office action is in response to application 18/580,613 filed on January 19, 2024.
Claims 1-6 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609(C), the applicant’s submission of the Information Disclosure Statement dated January 19, 2024 is acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending. As required by M.P.E.P 609, a copy of the PTOL-1449 initialed and dated by the examiner is attached to the office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. During examination proceedings, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319 (Fed. Cir. 1989). The examiner notes that the instant specification does not explicitly exclude transmission media; as such, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a “storage medium” covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of “computer readable storage media”. The transmission media are forms of energy, per se, and thus currently not believed to fall within a statutory category. The examiner suggests adding the term “non-transitory” to medium claim 6 to distinguish between statutory and non-statutory subject matter.
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 1-5 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, the preamble of the claim recites a “device” but the claim do not appear to include any computer hardware component. That is, the “units” recited in the body of the claim appear to only include software code in view of ([0010]) of the instant specification. As such, it is unclear if the claim is directed to only software per se; therefore, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination “units” are interpreted as hardware components.
Regarding 2-5, the claims to not address the indefiniteness issue of “units”. As such, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites “selects a common power supply” in line 7 of the claim. It is unclear of the recitation of a common power supply refers to the selected common power supply recited in parent claim 1 line 17 or another common power supply. As such, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is interpreted as “selects the common power supply”.
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites “selects an amplifier” in line 8 of the claim. It is unclear of the recitation of an amplifier refers to the selected amplifier recited in parent claim 1 lines 10-11 or another amplifier. As such, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is interpreted as “selects the amplifier”.
Regarding claim 4, the claim recites “selects an amplifier” in lines 8-9 of the claim. It is unclear of the recitation of an amplifier refers to the selected amplifier recited in parent claim 1 lines 10-11 or another amplifier. As such, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination the limitation is interpreted as “selects the amplifier”.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1, 2, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanouchi et al. (US20190088282A1) in further view of Kawana et al. (US20130173045A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tanouchi teaches an amplifier selection device for selecting an amplifier of a motor in an industrial machine, the amplifier selection device comprising:
a motor selection unit configured to select a motor of the industrial machine (FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating an amplifier selection sequence ... in step S102, the motor model information obtainment means 2 obtain information pertaining to the motor models selected for each of the spindle motors and the servo motors)([0031] and [0035]; motors are selected and associated information is retrieved);
an amplifier selection unit configured to select an amplifier suitable for the motor of the industrial machine (in step S103, the amplifier number calculation means 3 calculate the necessary numbers of each spindle amplifier and servo amplifier ... in step S104, the spindle amplifier selection means 4 select the spindle amplifiers to drive the spindle motors on the basis of the amplifier capacities and number of spindle motors)([0037] and [0039]; necessary amplification is calculated and amplifiers are selected);
an output calculation unit configured to calculate an output of the motor for each time when the motor is controlled according to a command of the program (in step S108, the consumed power calculation means 13 calculate time series data of the total value of power consumed by the motors for all axes when the operation program is executed)([0049]); and
a common power supply selection unit configured to determine a maximum value of the output of the motor for each time and to select a common power supply for supplying power to the amplifier on the basis of the maximum value (in step S109, the power source capacity calculation means 8 calculate the capacity of a main power source necessary for driving the motors and the capacity of a control power source necessary for driving the spindle amplifiers and the servo amplifiers ... includes a power source capacity determination means 14 that determine the capacity of the main power source on the basis of the maximum value of the power consumed by the motors … to select a main power source having a suitable capacity in accordance with the operation program)([0055], [0062], and [0063]; maximum value of power is calculated and an appropriate power supply is selected).
Tanouchi differs from the claim in that Tanouchi fails to teach acquiring and analyzing a program of the industrial machine. However, acquiring and analyzing a program of an industrial machine is taught by Kawana (The numerical control unit 40 includes a program reader/interpreter 44 which reads the NC program 42 and interprets it ... based on the NC program 42, the program reader/interpreter 44 analyzes the program and reads the reversal position of the motor M)([0033] and [0067]).
The examiner notes Tanouchi and Kawana teach program control systems. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tanouchi to include the acquiring and the analyzing of Kawana such that a program of an industrial machine is acquired and analyzed. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of discovering appropriate motors to control.
Regarding claim 2, Tanouchi-Kawana teach the amplifier selection device according to claim 1, wherein the industrial machine has a plurality of motors (Tanouchi - FIG. 4 is an example of the configuration of the machine tool system for driving the spindle motors and the servo motors)([0033]), the common power supply selection unit calculates a total value of outputs of the plurality of motors for each time (Tanouchi - a graph of time series data of the power consumed by the X-axis servo motor when the operation program is executed is created ... a graph of time series data of the power consumed by the Y-axis servo motor when the operation program is executed is created ... a graph of time series data of the power consumed by the Z-axis servo motor when the operation program is executed is created)([0050-0052]), determines a maximum value of the total value for each time (Tanouchi - FIG. 13 is a graph of the time series data of the total value of power consumed by the servo motors for all the axes when the operation program is executed. The graph in FIG. 13 is obtained by adding the values of FIGS. 10 to 12)([0053]), and selects a common power supply on the basis of the maximum value of the total value (Tanouchi - to select a main power source having a suitable capacity in accordance with the operation program)([0063]).
Regarding claim 6, the claim corresponds to device claim 1 and recites similar features in a storage medium form; therefore, the claim is rejected under similar rational.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanouchi, Kawana, and in further view of Kimura et al. (US20170371316A1).
Regarding claim 5, Tanouchi-Kawana teach the device as applied above, wherein a program is acquired (Kawana - At step 210 of FIG. 5, the program reader/interpreter 44 reads the NC program 42)([0054]). Tanouchi-Kawana differs from the claim in that Tanouchi-Kawana fails to teach a function of inputting the program and a function of changing the program. However, providing a function for user input selecting a program and a function of changing the program is taught by Kimura (The program managing unit 32 selects an appropriate machining program P1 or P3 according to operation of the operator using the GUI unit 24 ... The program editing unit 34 edits the machining program P1 in accordance with the input command information C)([0050] and [0053]).
The examiner notes Tanouchi, Kawana, and Kimura teach program control systems. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tanouchi-Kawana to include the functions of Kimura such that a function of inputting a program and a function of changing the program is provided. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of providing easy-to-understand interface for a user to select and edit a program.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection and in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider the reference fully when responding to this action.
The document cited therein and enumerated below teaches a method and apparatus for selecting amplifiers and motors.
US20170141581A1
US10699743B2
US10832295B2
US10838380B2
US10868481B2
US11353846B2
US12126288B2
US12282942B2
JP2010187464A
JP2017220991A
JP2019058046A
JP6381249B2
The document cited therein and enumerated below teaches a method and apparatus for analyzing a machine program.
US20110035044A1
US6546127B1
US6826434B1
CN103157866A
CN104570957A
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Yongjia Pan whose telephone number is (571)270-1177. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 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 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.
/YONGJIA PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118