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 Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 1 be found allowable, claim 6 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. JP 2015196169 A in view of Webster et al. US 20120138586 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Watanabe discloses a laser processing apparatus (Para. 1) for emitting processing laser light to a processing point on a processing surface of a workpiece (Para. 10), comprising: an optical scanning system (Para. 10 “focusing unit”) that focuses the processing laser light and measurement light at the processing point (Para. 10); and a controller (Fig. 1, Ref. 6) configured to: set a plurality of data acquisition positions on a line perpendicular to a processing direction within a section including a target position on the processing surface (Para. 4, wherein the data acquisition points of the target coordinate position and those acquisition points are used to inform the trajectory and the positional displacement could be perpendicular if the only displacement required was in the x or y direction), obtain data by superimposing the pieces of measurement data in the processing direction (Para. 78 wherein the visible laser beams R to the N lattice points are irradiated on the machining object as well as PR, which expresses the irradiation position (Para. 75)), and obtain an instruction value in a direction perpendicular to the processing direction at the target position based on the superimposed data from corrected processing data (Para. 112 wherein the Galvano controller computes the driving angle and speed and drives the motors to obtain data from the visible laser beam R), including instruction values which are set for processing points (Para. 112 wherein the Galvano controller computes the driving angle and speed and drives the motors to obtain data from the visible laser beam R); and control the processing laser light, the measurement light and one or more elements of the optical scanning system, based on the instruction value (Para. 112 wherein the Galvano controller computes the driving angle and speed and drives the motors to obtain data from the visible laser beam R).
Watanabe does not specifically disclose a measurement processor that measures a depth of a keyhole generated at the processing point irradiated with the processing laser light using the measurement light based on an optical path difference between incident measurement light and reflected measurement light reflected at the processing point; and wherein the controller acquires pieces of measurement data indicating depths of keyholes at the respective data acquisition positions during processing of the section.
However in the same field of endeavor, Webster teaches a measurement processor (Para. 174; Fig. 1, Ref. 22) that measures a depth of a keyhole (Para. 23) generated at the processing point irradiated with the processing laser light using the measurement light based on an optical path difference between incident measurement light and reflected measurement light reflected at the processing point (Para. 174; Fig. 1, Ref. 28); and wherein the controller acquires pieces of measurement data indicating depths of keyholes at the respective data acquisition positions during processing of the section (Para. 23).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included an optical interferometer that emits
measurement light to be applied to the processing point and generates an optical interference
signal based on interference caused by an optical path difference between the measurement light
reflected at the processing point and reference light, or acquiring measurement data indicating
the shapes of keyholes, as taught by Webster, in order to reduce voids and weld failures from an
insufficient keyhole formation process by introducing control methods (Webster Para. 8).
Regarding claim 2, Watanabe discloses wherein the controller is configured to obtain the instruction value in the direction perpendicular to the processing direction at the target position for two different axes (Para. 45).
Regarding claim 3, Watanabe discloses wherein the controller is configured to: set a lattice pattern on the processing surface, and set a lattice point of the lattice pattern at the target position (Para. 4).
Regarding claim 4, Watanabe discloses a laser processing method (Para. 1) performed by a laser processing apparatus (Fig. 1, Ref. 3) for emitting processing laser light to a processing point on a processing surface of a workpiece (Para. 10) including an optical scanning system (Para. 10 “focusing unit”) that focuses the processing laser light and measurement light at the processing point (Para. 10), the method comprising: setting a plurality of data acquisition positions on a line perpendicular to a processing direction within a section including a target position on the processing surface (Para. 4, wherein the data acquisition points of the target coordinate position and those acquisition points are used to inform the trajectory and the positional displacement could be perpendicular if the only displacement required was in the x or y direction); obtaining data by superimposing the pieces of measurement data in the processing direction (Para. 78 wherein the visible laser beams R to the N lattice points are irradiated on the machining object as well as PR, which expresses the irradiation position (Para. 75)); obtaining an instruction value in a direction perpendicular to the processing direction at the obtain an instruction value in a direction perpendicular to the processing direction at the target position based on the superimposed data from corrected processing data (Para. 112 wherein the Galvano controller computes the driving angle and speed and drives the motors to obtain data from the visible laser beam R) including instruction values which are set for processing points (Para. 112 wherein the Galvano controller computes the driving angle and speed and drives the motors to obtain data from the visible laser beam R); and controlling the processing laser light, the measurement light and one or more elements of the optical scanning system, based on the instruction value (Para. 112 wherein the Galvano controller computes the driving angle and speed and drives the motors to obtain data from the visible laser beam R).
Watanabe does not specifically disclose a measurement processor that measures a depth of a keyhole generated at the processing point irradiated with the processing laser light using the measurement light based on an optical path difference between incident measurement light and reflected measurement light reflected at the processing point; and wherein the controller acquires pieces of measurement data indicating depths of keyholes at the respective data acquisition positions during processing of the section.
However in the same field of endeavor, Webster teaches a measurement processor (Para. 174; Fig. 1, Ref. 22) that measures a depth of a keyhole (Para. 23) generated at the processing point irradiated with the processing laser light using the measurement light based on an optical path difference between incident measurement light and reflected measurement light reflected at the processing point (Para. 174; Fig. 1, Ref. 28); and wherein the controller acquires pieces of measurement data indicating depths of keyholes at the respective data acquisition positions during processing of the section (Para. 23).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included an optical interferometer that emits
measurement light to be applied to the processing point and generates an optical interference
signal based on interference caused by an optical path difference between the measurement light
reflected at the processing point and reference light, or acquiring measurement data indicating
the shapes of keyholes, as taught by Webster, in order to reduce voids and weld failures from an
insufficient keyhole formation process by introducing control methods (Webster Para. 8).
Regarding claim 5, Watanabe discloses a laser processing apparatus (Para. 1), comprising: a processing laser for emitting processing laser light to a processing point on a processing surface of a workpiece (Para. 10); a measurement light source for emitting a measurement light (Para. 10); an optical scanning system (Para. 10 “focusing unit”) that focuses the processing laser light and measurement light at the processing point (Para. 10); processing circuitry (Fig. 1, Ref. 6 “controller”) configured to: set a plurality of data acquisition positions on a line perpendicular to a processing direction within a section including a target position on the processing surface (Para. 4, wherein the data acquisition points of the target coordinate position and those acquisition points are used to inform the trajectory and the positional displacement could be perpendicular if the only displacement required was in the x or y direction); and control the processing laser light, the measurement light and one or more elements of the optical scanning system, based on the instruction value (Para. 112 wherein the Galvano controller computes the driving angle and speed and drives the motors to obtain data from the visible laser beam R).
Watanabe does not specifically disclose a measurement processor that measures a depth of a keyhole generated at the processing point irradiated with the processing laser light using the measurement light based on an optical path difference between incident measurement light and reflected measurement light reflected at the processing point; and wherein the controller acquires pieces of measurement data indicating depths of keyholes at the respective data acquisition positions during processing of the section; obtain a center position of the keyhole based on the pieces of measurement data, and obtain an instruction value corresponding to the center position from corrected processing data including instruction values which are set for processing points.
However in the same field of endeavor, Webster teaches a measurement processor (Para. 174; Fig. 1, Ref. 22) that measures a depth of a keyhole (Para. 23) generated at the processing point irradiated with the processing laser light using the measurement light based on an optical path difference between incident measurement light and reflected measurement light reflected at the processing point (Para. 174; Fig. 1, Ref. 28); and wherein the controller acquires pieces of measurement data indicating depths of keyholes at the respective data acquisition positions during processing of the section (Para. 23); obtain a center position of the keyhole based on the pieces of measurement data, and obtain an instruction value corresponding to the center position from corrected processing data including instruction values which are set for processing point (Para. 246 wherein the geometry of the weld is tracked along with the position of the material geometry with which the material modification beam is interacting. The center position along with the positions throughout the keyhole is obtained to perform this function.)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included an optical interferometer that emits
measurement light to be applied to the processing point and generates an optical interference
signal based on interference caused by an optical path difference between the measurement light
reflected at the processing point and reference light, or acquiring measurement data indicating
the shapes of keyholes, as taught by Webster, in order to reduce voids and weld failures from an
insufficient keyhole formation process by introducing control methods (Webster Para. 8).
Regarding claim 6, Watanabe discloses a laser processing apparatus (Para. 1) for emitting processing laser light to a processing point on a processing surface of a workpiece (Para. 10), comprising: an optical scanning system (Para. 10 ”focusing unit”) that focuses the processing laser light and measurement light at the processing point (Para. 10); and a controller configured to: set a plurality of data acquisition positions on a line perpendicular to a processing direction within a section including a target position on the processing surface (Para. 4, wherein the data acquisition points of the target coordinate position and those acquisition points are used to inform the trajectory and the positional displacement could be perpendicular if the only displacement required was in the x or y direction), obtain data by superimposing the pieces of measurement data in the processing direction (Para. 78 wherein the visible laser beams R to the N lattice points are irradiated on the machining object as well as PR, which expresses the irradiation position (Para. 75)), and obtain an instruction value in a direction perpendicular to the processing direction at the target position based on the superimposed data (Para. 112 wherein the Galvano controller computes the driving angle and speed and drives the motors to obtain data from the visible laser beam R), the instruction value is to be included in corrected processing data which are set for processing points (Para. 112 wherein the Galvano controller computes the driving angle and speed and drives the motors to obtain data from the visible laser beam R); and control the processing laser light, the measurement light and one or more elements of the optical scanning system, based on the corrected processing data (Para. 112 wherein the Galvano controller computes the driving angle and speed and drives the motors to obtain data from the visible laser beam R).
Watanabe does not specifically disclose a measurement processor that measures a depth of a keyhole generated at the processing point irradiated with the processing laser light using the measurement light based on an optical path difference between incident measurement light and reflected measurement light reflected at the processing point; and wherein the controller acquires pieces of measurement data indicating depths of keyholes at the respective data acquisition positions during processing of the section.
However in the same field of endeavor, Webster teaches a measurement processor (Para. 174; Fig. 1, Ref. 22) that measures a depth of a keyhole (Para. 23) generated at the processing point irradiated with the processing laser light using the measurement light based on an optical path difference between incident measurement light and reflected measurement light reflected at the processing point (Para. 174; Fig. 1, Ref. 28); and wherein the controller acquires pieces of measurement data indicating depths of keyholes at the respective data acquisition positions during processing of the section (Para. 23).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included an optical interferometer that emits
measurement light to be applied to the processing point and generates an optical interference
signal based on interference caused by an optical path difference between the measurement light
reflected at the processing point and reference light, or acquiring measurement data indicating
the shapes of keyholes, as taught by Webster, in order to reduce voids and weld failures from an
insufficient keyhole formation process by introducing control methods (Webster Para. 8).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTINA B BURNS whose telephone number is (571)272-8973. The examiner can normally be reached Monday and Wednesday 6:00 am-12:00 pm and Tuesday 6:00 am-2:30 pm.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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.
/K.B.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/JUSTIN C DODSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights