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 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 2-7 and 10 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.
With regards to claim 2, the claim states “in a state in which a first die is closed with a straight-pipe-shaped material being disposed in the cavity of the first die” and further states “while pressurizing the material with the liquid supplied to an inside thereof”, this renders the claim indefinite since it is unclear if these limitations are intended to further define the forming an arm precursor member step set forth in claim 1 or if the limitations are intending to set forth an additional step of forming the pipe member prior to the forming of the arm precursor member. It is noted that should it be intending to further define the forming an arm precursor member step of claim 1 it is unclear if the first die is in addition to the die previously recited or if the die of claim 1 is being further defined as a first die. Additionally, if it is intending to set forth an additional step of forming the pipe member prior to forming the precursor member than it is unclear how the same liquid is to be supplied to the die and the first die since these would be two separate elements. Clarification and/or correction is required.
With regards to claim 3, the claim states “wherein the flange portion is formed by bending an entire circumference of an end of the arm precursor member…” it is unclear if this limitation is intending to further define the machining that forms the flange portion or if the limitation is intending to set forth a forming step of bending in addition to the machining step of claim 1. Clarification and/or correction is required.
With regards to claim 5, there appears to be insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the bent end” found in line 3. Specifically it is unclear if this is intending to refer to the flange portion which is formed by bending a circumference of the end of the arm precursor member or is it intending to refer to an end of the precursor member that is bent that is not the flange portion. Clarification and/or correction is required.
With regards to claim 7, the claim states “a work opening is formed by cutting off a portion of a wall of the arm precursor member” it is unclear if this is intending to set forth an additional step to the step set forth in claim 1 for forming a second work opening or if this is intending to refer to the same work opening formed in claim 1, in which case it is not further defining the step recited in claim 1.
With regards to claim 10, there appears to be insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the bent end” found in line 10. Specifically it is unclear if this is intending to refer to the flange portion which is formed by bending a circumference of the end of the arm precursor member or is it intending to refer to an end of the precursor member that is bent that is not the flange portion. Clarification and/or correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hasshi et al (US 5,662,349).
In reference to claim 1, Hasshi et al discloses a method of producing an arm structure (A) comprising
forming an arm precursor member having an external shape of the arm structure by, in a state in which a die (14, 15) is closed with a metal pipe member (P) being disposed in a cavity thereof, pressurizing the pipe member with liquid (oil) supplied to an inside thereof to cause an external surface of the pipe member to be pressed against an inner surface of the cavity [see figure 7B; col. 3 lines 50-62];
machining at least an end of the formed arm precursor member to form a flange portion to be attached to a driven body [see col. 4 lines 32-38; figures 8B & 8D], and
forming a work opening by cutting off a portion of a wall of the arm precursor member, thereby producing the arm structure [see col. 4 lines 7-10; portions of the wall of the precursor are cut off to form the plate-like portions which results in an opening within the member].
In reference to claim 2, the pipe member is formed by, in a state in which a first die (20) [see figure 7C], is closed with a straight-pipe-shaped material being disposed in the cavity of the first die (20), changing a shape of the cavity of the first die so that both ends of the material are bent in a same direction, while pressurizing the material with the liquid supplied to an inside thereof [see col. 3 line 64- col. 4 line 7; see figure 7C].
In reference to claim 3, the flange portion is formed by bending an entire circumference of an end of the arm precursor member at least ones in a radial direction into a ring shape having a center hole [see figures 8A-8B; col. 4 lines 32-38].
In reference to claim 4, Hasshi et al further discloses the flange portion is formed by bending the end of the arm precursor member radially inward, as seen in figure 8B.
In reference to claim 5, Hasshi et al further discloses joining a separate ring-shaped reinforcing member (10) to the bent end of the arm precursor member [see figure 8F, col. 4 lines 40-42].
In reference to claim 6, Hasshi et al further discloses forming a reinforcing rib (portion of material surrounding holes 23] is formed so as to extend between a rear side of an attachment surface of the flange portion and an inner wall surface of the arm precursor member, as seen in figure 8B.
In reference to claim 7, wherein a working opening is formed by cutting off a portion of a wall of the arm precursor member [see col. 4 lines 7-10].
In reference to claim 10, Hasshi et al discloses a method of producing an arm structure (A) comprising
forming an arm precursor member having an external shape of the arm structure by, in a state in which a die (14, 15) is closed with a metal pipe member (P) being disposed in a cavity thereof, pressurizing the pipe member with liquid (oil) supplied to an inside thereof to cause an external surface of the pipe member to be pressed against an inner surface of the cavity [see figure 7B; col. 3 lines 50-62];
forming a ring-shaped flange portion having a center hole by bending an entire circumference of at least one end of the formed arm precursor member at least once in a radial direction [see figures 8A-8B; col. 4 lines 32-38], and
joining a separate ring-shaped reinforcing member (10) to the bent end of the arm precursor member, thereby producing the arm structure [see figure 8F, col. 4 lines 40-42].
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.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasshi et al.
In reference to claims 8 and 9, Hasshi et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein a heat treatment is performed.
However, it would have been obvious to one having skill in the art at the time the invention was made to perform heat treatment processes on a workpiece for the purpose of strengthening the workpiece to a desired strength, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art that heat treatments are performed for increase the strength of a material when desired.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hasshi et al to include a heat treatment, since it is well known in the art to perform heat treatment to achieve a desired strength of the workpiece.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 13, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that “Hasshi does not disclose or suggest forming a work opening by cutting off a portion of a wall of the arm precursor member” and further argues an opening or a cutout does not immediately amount to a disclosure of the “work opening” of the claimed invention.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. While not shown in the figures Hasshi discloses in col. 4 lines 7-10 that the plate-like portions 21, 21, 21, 21, are formed by cutting-out the opposite ends of the pipe material, therefore Hasshi does in fact disclose cutting off a portion of a wall of the arm precursor member. Additionally, the removal of these portions results in a work opening since there is now an opening present at each end of the member. As far as Applicant’s argument that an opening or cutout is not a work opening, absent any defining characteristics in the claim to define a work opening the Examiner takes the position that the opening of Hasshi is considered to be a work opening since it is later formed further to allow for a connection to another member. It is noted that Applicant fails to provide a special definition for “work opening” in the specification thus the broadest reasonable interpretation is being applied to the term.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Debra Sullivan whose telephone number is (571)272-1904. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4:30pm 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, Chris Templeton can be reached on (571) 270-1477. 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.
/Debra M Sullivan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights