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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
The claims recite the limitation “the laser” which lacks sufficient antecedent basis. The claims will be interpreted as reciting “an optical axis of [[the]]a laser of the laser welding apparatus”
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 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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto (JP 2007021574 A) in view of Bergmann (EP 3098019 A1).
Regarding claim 1,
Yamamoto discloses:
A laser welding apparatus [pps. 1-3: “The present invention relates to a laser processing head that effectively prevents spatter and fumes generated during processing with a short focus laser processing apparatus from damaging the surface of a protective glass…. In order to solve the above-described problems, a laser processing head of the present invention is a laser processing head of a laser processing apparatus that processes a workpiece by irradiating a laser beam, and the laser beam passes through the inside and is applied to an inner surface. A cylindrical nozzle body having a conical surface, an air supply unit that blows out air so that air flows in a curtain shape along the inner surface of the nozzle body, and an assist gas is supplied to the workpiece of the workpiece And a gas supply unit.”; figs. 1-4] comprising:
a laser scanner [Yamamoto discloses a weld line 4 and a laser LB, corresponding to the conventional practice of controlling the relative movement of a laser and workpiece, i.e., scanning of a laser beam along a workpiece so as to form a weld line; Examiner notes that this known structure in the art was not shown in the instant figures, and only corresponding reference figures were shown, thus depicting the conventional arrangement thereof relative to the workpiece]; and
a protective optical member [protective glass 3, nozzle body 1] disposed between the laser scanner and
a workpiece [workpiece W],
wherein the laser welding apparatus further comprises:
an upper-side gas supply unit [fig. 1: air supply unit 21, air supply unit 31; p. 5: “The air supply unit 31 is a portion that ejects curtain-shaped air along the tapered surface 35, and is configured to eject the air A <b> 1 from the ejection passage S <b> 1 provided in the upper portion of the tapered surface 35…The air supply unit 21 is a part that ejects air toward the surface of the protective glass 3, and is configured to eject air A <b> 2 from the ejection passage S <b> 2 provided in the base end part 20 of the nozzle body 1. Air A2 is supplied from the air supply source 9 to the ejection passage S2.”]; and
a lower-side gas supply unit disposed below the upper-side gas supply unit [fig. 1: gas supply unit 41; p. 6: “The gas supply unit 41 is a part that ejects the assist gas G toward the welding line 4, and includes an assist gas supply source 45, a gas pipe 44, a joint 43, and a gas nozzle 40. The gas nozzle 40 has a through passage 42 that sends the assist gas G toward the welding line 4, and is connected to the lower end of the tip 30 of the nozzle body 1.”],
the protective optical member includes
a plate-like part [i.e., glass 3] and
a cylindrical part extending downward from an outer edge of the plate-like part [i.e., nozzle body 1; p. 5: “The nozzle body 1 has a cylindrical shape and has an inwardly tapered surface 35 that tapers toward the weld line 4. The nozzle body 1 is divided into a base end portion 20 and a tip end portion 30, and the base end portion 20 is supported on the support plate 5 by a flange portion 22.”],
the upper-side gas supply unit is disposed below the plate-like part of the protective optical member [see fig. 1],
the upper-side gas supply unit includes
a plurality of first ejection ports configured to eject gas to a center of the plate-like part [see fig. 2, showing a plurality of ejection ports at inner/central ends of ejection passages S2, aimed towards a center of the glass], and
a plurality of second ejection ports configured to eject gas downward with respect to the plate-like part [i.e., ejection passage S1 alternatively formed as a plurality of holes/ports; p. 7: “As mentioned above, although embodiment of this invention has been described, embodiment of this invention is not restricted to this. For example, the ejection passage S1 is formed as a tapered gap, but is not limited thereto, and a plurality of tapered holes may be provided.”],
the cylindrical part is disposed between the upper-side gas supply unit and the lower-side gas supply unit [see fig. 1, showing portions of nozzle body 1 disposed between the upper/lower-side gas supply units], and includes
a [see fig. 4, showing an embodiment with gas opening 63a; p. 7: “In the second embodiment, a Venturi tube 61 is used in place of the suction tube 51 in the first embodiment. The Venturi tube 61 is connected to the nozzle body 1 via the connection member 60. Further, the venturi pipe 61 has widened openings at both ends, and the opening 63a of the air nozzle 63 is disposed toward the proximal end side (inside) of the venturi pipe 61 in the widened opening 62 on the distal end side. With this configuration, the air supplied from the air supply source 65 is back-injected from the opening 63 a through the air pipe 64 through the air nozzle 63. By this reverse injection, ambient gas is sucked, and spatter S and fume H generated in the weld line 4 are also sucked.”], and
the lower-side gas supply unit includes
a [see figs. 1 and 4, showing an ejection port at an inner end of ejection passage 42].
However, Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose:
a plurality of gas feeding ports for feeding gas from an outside of the cylindrical part into an inside thereof;
a plurality of lower-side ejection ports configured to eject gas downward from a lower end of the cylindrical part.
Bergmann, in the same field of endeavor [p. 1: “This too --> However, protective glass must be of high optical quality and is therefore relatively expensive, especially in scanning welding devices, in which the laser beam is deflected by a mirror system and consequently the protective glass must have a relatively large diameter.”], teaches another alternative configuration for a cylindrical part and a lower-side gas supply unit:
a plurality of gas feeding ports for feeding gas from an outside of the cylindrical part into an inside thereof [fig. 1: ventilation openings 44; p. 3: “In the cylindrical nozzle 32 of the nozzle 28 a ring of ventilation openings 44 is formed. Between the annular flange 22 and the support ring 26 is a gap in the spaces between the holders 24 so that ambient air can flow through this gap and through the ventilation openings 44 in the space inside the nozzle 28 and above the outlet gap 34. In this way, the formation of a negative pressure in this space is prevented and thus avoided that dirt-laden air is sucked in from the bottom of the nozzle 28 forth and forms a dirt deposit on the protective glass 20.”];
a plurality of lower-side ejection ports configured to eject gas downward from a lower end of the cylindrical part [see figs. 1 and 2, wherein a plurality of ejection ports are formed by the annular exit slit 34 and swirl vanes 40; p. 3: “How clearer in Fig. 2 can be seen, 34 swirl vanes 40 are arranged in the exit slit, which twist the exiting air flow, so that in the space between the nozzle 28 and the workpiece 18, an air vortex 42 is formed. In this air vortex 42, the converging incoming air from all sides in the axial direction of the laser optics 14 is deflected, so that a strong twisted air flow is formed, which propagates along the laser beam 16 to the workpiece 18 and flows radially only at the workpiece surface. By this air flow welding spatter and smoke and gases that spread in the direction of the protective glass 20, effectively retained and dissipated to the outside, so that they do not reach the protective glass 20.”].
Therefore, since it is obvious to substitute one known element for another to obtain predictable results [see MPEP 2143(B)], in view of the teachings of the prior art presented above, a PHOSITA would have found it obvious to substitute Yamamoto’s gas feeding port/cylindrical part and lower-side gas supply unit with Bergmann’s plurality of ports so as to advantageously form a vortex and further reduce risk of contamination or fogging of the protective glass.
Regarding claim 2, Yamamoto in view of Bergmann discloses the laser welding apparatus according to claim 1.
Yamamoto as modified by Bergmann further discloses:
wherein the plurality of second ejection ports eject gas from the outer edge of the plate-like part in a direction inclined toward an optical axis of the laser [Yamamoto shows ejected gas A1 inclined toward an optical axis of the laser beam].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto (JP 2007021574 A) in view of Bergmann (EP 3098019 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Morgan (US 4303824 A).
Regarding claim 3, Yamamoto in view of Bergmann discloses the laser welding apparatus according to claim 1.
However, Yamamoto as modified by Bergmann does not disclose:
wherein the plurality of second ejection ports eject gas from the outer edge of the plate-like part in a direction parallel to an optical axis of the laser.
Morgan, in the same field of endeavor [figs. 1-5: housing 30, glass lens 22, gas ejection ports 42/44, pipes 43/45; col. 5-6: “Although this invention is described in relation to preferred embodiments thereof, variations and modifications will occur to those skilled in the art. By way of example, the housing may be of any shape that supports a movement of air exhibiting vortexing and/or a Venturi effect and exiting the orifice in the constricted end of the housing with a velocity that is sufficient for dispersing the majority of particles and inhibiting them entering the orifice and contacting the lens surface.”], teaches that the orientation of the pipes, and thus the direction of the ejected gas, is not limited, and may be modified to yield predictable results [col. 6: “Also, the pipes 43 and 45 may be oriented other than tangentially to the inner surface of the housing, although this is believed to be the optimum orientation. And the pipes may be oriented orthogonal to the axis of the housing and accomplish the desired result, since the moving air will be directed to the apex end of the conical section in an equilibrium condition. Further, the pipes may be oriented at an angle of greater than 5• with respect to the axis C-C in FIG. 3, although an angle of much greater than this may reduce the vorticity of the gas moving in the housing.”].
Therefore, since it is obvious to apply a known technique to improve a similar device to yield predictable results [see MPEP 2143(C)], in view of the teachings of Morgan presented above, a PHOSITA would have found it obvious to modify the laser welding apparatus of Yamamoto and Bergmann so as to arrive at claim 3 (a laser welding apparatus with ejection ports angled to eject gas parallel to the laser beam, e.g., tangentially to the vertical inner surface of Bergmann) because one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known method of enhancement to a "base" device in the prior art and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE J EVANGELISTA whose telephone number is (571)272-6093. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm 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, Edward F Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/THEODORE J EVANGELISTA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights