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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because each of Figures 1-3 exhibits poor line quality. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “positioning vice” of claim 3, the “press plate” of claim 3, the “clamping fixtures with different specifications” of claim 5, the “guide pins” of claim 5, the “first transmission mechanisms” of clam 6, the “second transmission mechanism” of clam 6, the “third transmission mechanism” of clam 6, the “first balancing device” of claim 7, the “fourth transmission mechanisms” of clam 8, the “fifth transmission mechanism” of clam 8, the “sixth transmission mechanism” of clam 8, the “seventh transmission mechanism” of clam 8, and the “second balancing device” of claim 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I (claims 1-10, drawn to “A mirror milling device for machining an arched annular thin-walled workpiece”) in the reply filed on 5/22/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the following ground(s):
In response to the Restriction Requirement and in the interest of facilitating the prosecution, Applicant elects Group I. Claims 1-10, drawn to drawn to a "A mirror milling device for machining an arched annular thin-walled workpiece" with traverse. Applicant respectfully traverses the restriction requirement on the grounds that the Examiner has not demonstrated a serious search and/or examination burden as required under the applicable rules. The Examiner has not provided sufficient reasoning or evidence to establish that a proper examination of the claimed inventions would require distinct and separate searches, nor has the Examiner demonstrated that examining the various groups and species would be unduly burdensome. In fact, there is substantial overlap in the search and examination requirements for the group of inventions, as they are closely related in subject matter, functionality, and technical field. Given this overlap, a single search and examination would be capable of addressing all the claimed inventions without undue effort.
In conclusion, the Examiner has not met the requirement to demonstrate the inventions are distinct or to establish a serious search burden. As a result, Applicant respectfully requests that the restriction requirement be withdrawn and that the groups of inventions be examined together as they are not distinct and do not impose an undue examination burden.
Further, Applicant retains the right to file a divisional application for non-elected embodiment. Applicant wishes to have rejoinder for the process claims if product claims are allowed.
This is not found to be persuasive. With respect to Applicant’s argument in which “Applicant respectfully traverses the restriction requirement on the grounds that the Examiner has not demonstrated a serious search and/or examination burden as required under the applicable rules,” Examiner notes the following:
According to MPEP § 808.02:
Every requirement to restrict has two aspects: (A) the reasons (as distinguished from the mere statement of conclusion) why each invention as claimed is either independent or distinct from the other(s); and (B) the reasons why there would be a serious burden on the examiner if restriction is not required...
Regarding part (B) (which is the part that deals with Applicant’s traversal arguments regarding search burden, MPEP section 808.02 (titled “Establishing Burden”) notes that:
Where the inventions as claimed are shown to be independent or distinct under the criteria of MPEP § 806.05(c) - § 806.06, the examiner, in order to establish reasons for insisting upon restriction, must explain why there would be a serious burden on the examiner if restriction is not required. Thus the examiner must show by appropriate explanation one of the following:
(A) Separate classification thereof: This shows that each invention has attained recognition in the art as a separate subject for inventive effort, and also a separate field of search. Patents need not be cited to show separate classification.
(B) A separate status in the art when they are classifiable together: Even though they are classified together, each invention can be shown to have formed a separate subject for inventive effort when the examiner can show a recognition of separate inventive effort by inventors. Separate status in the art may be shown by citing patents which are evidence of such separate status, and also of a separate field of search.
(C) A different field of search: Where it is necessary to search for one of the inventions in a manner that is not likely to result in finding art pertinent to the other invention(s) (e.g., searching different classes /subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries, a different field of search is shown, even though the two are classified together. The indicated different field of search must in fact be pertinent to the type of subject matter covered by the claims. Patents need not be cited to show different fields of search.
Please note that it is only necessary to show one of A, B, or C to establish burden. In the instant case, A was established, noting that the two inventions (Inventions I and II) are classified in different subclasses, as set forth in paragraph 2 of the Restriction Requirement mailed on 7/2/2023. Additionally, C was established. In paragraph 5 of the Requirement for Restriction mailed on 3/11/2026, it was established that at the very least, different search queries would be necessary to search the identified inventions. Thus, burden has been properly established. Based on the foregoing, Applicant’s arguments are not found to be persuasive.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 11-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 5/22/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: On lines 4-5 of the claim, “a workpiece” should be changed to “[[a]] the workpiece”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 3, 5, and 8-10 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.
Lines 1-3 of claim 3 state, “wherein the clamping fixture is fixed in different clamping ways of clamping by a positioning vice or pressing by a press plate based on different edge states of the workpiece.” First, this limitation is viewed to be vague and indefinite, because it is unclear as to what is meant by the clamping fixture being “fixed in different clamping ways.” This limitation is further viewed to be vague and indefinite, because it is unclear as to what is meant by “different edge states of the workpiece.” What is an edge state of the workpiece?
Lines 4-5 of claim 3 state, “the clamping fixture with different specifications and dimensions are capable of being changed to adapt to clamping of workpieces with different specifications.” This limitation is viewed to be vague and indefinite, because it is unclear as to what is meant by “the clamping fixture with different specifications and dimensions.” How or in what way does the clamping fixture have different specifications? In the context of claim 3, what is meant by the clamping fixture with different dimensions? Are the dimensions of the clamping fixture adjustable in some manner such that the dimensions are able to differ and adapt to different sized and/or shaped workpieces, for example?
Lines 1-3 of claim 5 state, “wherein the worktable is of an annular structure, and clamping fixtures with different specifications are clamped with/separated from the worktable by means of zero point positioning and are guided by guide pins, and the guide pins function to protect the zero point positioning.” First, this limitation is viewed to be vague and indefinite, because it is unclear if the “clamping fixtures” of claim 5 are provided in addition to the clamping fixture of claim 1, or if, for example, the clamping fixture of claim 1 is included in the clamping fixtures of claim 5. In other words, what is the relationship between the clamping fixture of claim 1 and the clamping fixtures of claim 5? This limitation is further viewed to be vague and indefinite, because it is unclear as to how or what way the clamping fixtures “are guided by guide pins,” and how or in what way that “the guide pins function to protect the zero point positioning.”
Lines 9-10 of claim 8 state, “the rotary table is connected to the fixed base by a collar and is driven by a fourth transmission mechanism.” This limitation is viewed to be vague and indefinite, because by setting forth “a fourth transmission mechanism” in claim 8 without having previously set forth “a first transmission mechanism,” a “second transmission mechanism,” and a “third transmission mechanism” in claim 8, or in claim 1 on which claim 8 directly depends, it is unclear if the unclaimed first, second and third transmission mechanism are implicitly required.
Lines 1-2 of claim 9 state, “wherein the internal support and measurement head assembly has six axes, comprising axes X2, Y2, Z2, A2, C2, and W2.” This limitation is viewed to be vague and indefinite, because by setting forth “axes X2, Y2, Z2, A2, C2, and W2” in claim 9 without having previously set forth “axes X1, Y1, Z1, A1, C1, and W1” in claim 9, or in either of claim 1 or claim 8 on which claim 9 depends either directly or indirectly, it is unclear if the unclaimed axes X1, Y1, Z1, A1, C1, and W1 are implicitly required.
Line 10 of claim 9 states, “a second balancing device is provided.” This limitation is viewed to be vague and indefinite, because by setting forth “a second balancing device” in claim 9 without having previously set forth “a first balancing device” in claim 9, or in either of claim 1 or claim 8 on which claim 9 depends either directly or indirectly, it is unclear if the unclaimed first balancing device is implicitly required.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie (China Publication No. CN 114769686 A) in view of Guo (China Publication No. CN 105772812 A) and further in view of Gong (CN 101954604 A).
Please be advised that an EPO Machine Translation of Xie is relied upon below. This EPO Machine Translation has been furnished with this office action.
Please be advised that an EPO Machine Translation of Guo is relied upon below. This EPO Machine Translation has been furnished with this office action.
Please be advised that an EPO Machine Translation of Gong is relied upon below. This EPO Machine Translation has been furnished with this office action.
Claim 1: Figures 1-2 of Xie show therein a mirror milling device [EPO Machine Translation, paragraph 0047] for machining an arched annular thin-walled workpiece (2). As can be seen within Figures 1 and 2 of Xie, the mirror milling device comprises an external vertical gantry milling head assembly (300+400), an internal support head assembly (500+600), an annular turntable (200), and a worktable (100).
Regarding the external vertical gantry milling head assembly (300+400), it is located on an outer side of the workpiece (2) and implements external milling of the workpiece (2) by means of a processing device (400) (see Figures 3-4) thereof.
Regarding the internal support head assembly (500+600), it is located on an inner side of the workpiece (2) and it implements internal support of the workpiece (2) by means of the support (600) (see Figures 9-10) thereof [EPO Machine Translation, paragraph 0054].
Xie though, does not disclose the internal support head assembly (500+600) as further providing for “measurement of the workpiece [2].”
Figure 3 of Guo; however, shows a portion of a 5-axis mirror milling CNC machine [EPO Machine Translation of Guo, paragraph 0029] comprising a follower (5) on which is disposed a support unit (7) and a thickness gauge (6) which measures a thickness of a part (1) [EPO Machine Translation of Guo, paragraph 0034]. Please be advised that the follower (5) moves synchronously with a cutting tool (1) (see Figure 3), and has a degree of freedom to move along an inner side of the part (1) and a degree of freedom to swing [EPO Machine Translation of Guo, paragraph 0035].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the support (600) of the internal support head assembly (500+600) of Xie with the thickness gauge (6) of Guo, so as to provide the internal support head assembly (500+600) of Xie with the added capability of being able to measure a thickness of the workpiece (2). Due to the addition of the thickness gauge (6) of Guo, the modified internal support head assembly (500+600) of Xie will hereinafter be referred to by Examiner as the internal support and measurement head assembly (500+600+6) of Xie. Based on the foregoing, the modified mirror milling device of Xie comprises the internal support and measurement head assembly (500+600+6), which is located on the inner side of the workpiece (2) and implements internal support and measurement of said workpiece (2).
Next, as can be seen within Figures 1-2 of Xie, the internal support and measurement head assembly (500+600+6) and the external vertical gantry milling head assembly (300+400) are in a vertically opposite position relationship with one another.
As can also be seen within Figures 1-2 of Xie, the annular turntable (200) is located between the internal support and measurement head assembly (500+600+6) and the external vertical gantry milling head assembly (300+400). Please note that the annular turntable (200) is disposed upon the worktable (100), and further note that through actuation of multiple turntable motors (210) and multiple gears (220) [EPO Machine Translation of Xie, paragraph 0067], the annular turntable (200) implements (angular) positioning of the workpiece (2). This is because the workpiece (2) is received by the annular turntable (200), and because said annular turntable (200) is angularly displaceable by means of the multiple turntable motors (210) and gears (220).
Xie/Guo though, does not provide disclosure on the annular turntable (200) further implementing “clamping and fixation of the workpiece.”
Figure 1 of Gong though, shows a annular table/chassis (1) for clamping of an annular thin walled workpiece (10) [EPO Machine Translation of Gong, paragraph 0002]. Please be advised that the annular chassis (1) is provided with a plurality of inner (13) and outer vises (12) for clamping and fixation of the workpiece (10). Due to the plurality of inner and outer vises (12, 13) being able to incur radial displacement, workpieces (10) of varying diameters are able to be clamped and fixed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the annular turntable (200) of Xie with the plurality of inner (13) and outer vises (12) of Gong, so as to provide the annular turntable (200) of the mirror milling device of Xie with the advantage of being able to clamp and fix workpieces (2) of varying diameters. As a result of this modification in which the annular turntable (200) of Xie is provided with the plurality of inner (13) and outer vises (12) of Gong, the annular turntable (200) of Xie will hereinafter be referred to by Examiner as the “clamping fixture [200].”
Based on the foregoing, when the workpiece (2) is clamped and fixed to the clamping fixture (200) of Xie by means of the plurality of inner (13) and outer vises (12) thereof, and when the multiple turntable motors (210) and gears (220) of Xie are actuated, the clamping fixture (200) implements “positioning, clamping and fixation of the workpiece.”
As such, within the modified mirror milling device of Xie, the clamping fixture (200) is located between the internal support and measurement head assembly (500+600+6) and the external vertical gantry milling head assembly (300+400), and said clamping fixture (200) implements positioning, clamping, and fixation of the workpiece (2).
Lastly, as can be seen in Figure 14 of Xie, the worktable (100) is located below the clamping fixture (200) and functions to support and fix the clamping fixture (200).
Claim 2: The internal support and measurement head assembly (500+600+6) and the external vertical gantry milling head assembly (300+400) form an internal and external synchronous motion relation with respect to the workpiece (2) in the form of a vertically opposite layout structure. This is known as Xie discloses an axis of the processing device (400) of the external vertical gantry milling head assembly (300+400) and an axis of the support (600) (to which the thickness gauge (6) of Guo is attached) of the internal support and measurement head assembly (500+600+6) being overlapped. As such, the support (600) supports a processing position of the processing device (400) and deformation of the workpiece (2) is avoided [EPO Machine Translation of Xie, paragraph 0054]. Also, by means of the machining positioning assembly (300) of the external vertical gantry milling head assembly (300+400), the processing device (400) is able to have strokes that cover an entire workpiece (2) machining region. Likewise, by means of the support positioning assembly (500) of the internal support and measurement head assembly (500+600+6), the support (600) and corresponding thickness gauge (60) have strokes that cover an entire workpiece (2) machining region. Lastly, due to the axis of the processing device (400) and the axis of the support (600) overlapped, when there is real-time milling, there is also follow-up support and measurement.
Claim 3: First, it is reiterated that in the rejection of claim 1, it was advised that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the annular turntable (200) of Xie with the plurality of inner (13) and outer vises (12) of Gong, so as to provide the annular turntable (200) of the mirror milling device of Xie with the advantage of being able to clamp and fix workpieces (2) of varying diameters. As a result of this modification in which the annular turntable (200) of Xie is provided with the plurality of inner (13) and outer vises (12) of Gong, the annular turntable (200) of Xie will hereinafter be referred to by Examiner as the “clamping fixture [200].” Noting this, through radial displacement of the plurality of inner (13) and outer vises (12) thereof, the clamping fixture (200) is fixed in different clamping ways of clamping such that a clamping range thereof is (radially) adjustable. As such, the clamping fixture has different specifications and dimensions that are able to be changed so as to adapt to workpieces of different specifications, i.e. different diameters. It is also noted that depending upon different edge states of the workpiece, the clamping fixture (200) is fixed in different clamping ways of clamping by positioning vises which correspond to the plurality of inner (13) and outer vises (12) thereof.
Claim 4: As can be seen in Figure 14 of Xie, the clamping fixture (200) is of an annular structure.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie (China Publication No. CN 114769686 A) in view of Guo (China Publication No. CN 105772812 A) in view of Gong (CN 101954604 A), and further in view of Sun (U.S. PG Publication No. 2021/0170536 A1).
Claim 5: First, as can be seen in Figure 14 of Xie, the worktable (100) is of an annular structure. As can also be seen in Figure 14 of Xie, the clamping fixture (200) is supported from below by the worktable (100). Said worktable (100) is shown as having an annular rail as well as a plurality of sliders, wherein the plurality of sliders connect the annular rail with the bottom of the clamping fixture (200) for angular displacement of the clamping fixture, for example.
Xie though, does not provide disclosure on the clamping fixture (200) being “clamped with/separated from the worktable by means of zero point positioning and are guided by guide pins, and the guide pins function to protect the point positioning.”
Sun though, shows in Figures 1 and 2 a plurality of zero points positioners (1-3) that are provided on an upper surface of a base plate (1-1) and further shows a plurality of guide pins (1-4) that are provided on an underside of a working plate (1-2), wherein the plurality of zero points positioners (1-3) and the plurality of guide pins (1-4) interface with one another so as to provide zero point positioning. When each of the guide pins (1-4) interfaces with a corresponding one of the plurality of zero points positioners (1-3), for example, the plurality of guide pins (1-4) protect the zero point positioning. Please note that the working plate (1-2) is clamped with and separated from the base plate (1-1) by means of zero positioning, and the working plate (1-2) is guided into the zero point positioning by means of the plurality of guide pins (1-4) thereof. This is because the receipt of the plurality of guide pins (1-4) into the plurality of zero points positioners (1-3) guides the working plate (1-2) into the appropriate position/location.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the worktable (100) and the clamping fixture (200) of Xie with the plurality of zero points positioners (1-3) and the plurality of guide pins (1-4) of Sun, respectively, so as to provide the advantage of ensuring that in the mirror milling device of Xie that clamping fixtures with different specifications are all clamped in the same position/location on the worktable (100). In making this modification, each of the plurality of zero points positioners (1-3) is provided on the upper surface of the worktable (1), specifically on a corresponding slider of Xie, while each of the plurality of guide pins (1-4) is provided on an underside of a clamping fixture (200). With this setup, clamping fixtures (200) with different specifications are clamped with/separated from the worktable (100) by means of zero point positioning and are guided by the plurality of guide pins (1-4), the guide pins (1-4) functioning to protect the zero point positioning.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 7 are 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.
Claims 8-10 would be allowable if rewritten (without broadening) to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Liu (China Publication No. CN 114770194 A) shows within at least Figures 1-3, a mirror milling device having an external vertical gantry milling head assembly (300+400), an internal support head assembly (500+600), an annular turntable (200), and a worktable (100). Varrelmann (U.S. PG Publication No. 2019/0001398 A1) shows a processing station (1) in which there is an external vertical gantry head assembly (3+7), a clamping fixture (4), and an internal lower tool (13) that is disposed opposite an upper tool (7) of the external vertical gantry head assembly (3+7). Lastly, Koelling (U.S. Patent No. 5,711,195 A) shows a clamping fixture for annular workpieces (20), the clamping fixture comprising a plurality of clamps (40) that are angularly separated from one another.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Vitale whose telephone number is (571)270-5098. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM- 6:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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.
/MICHAEL VITALE/Examiner, Art Unit 3722
/SUNIL K SINGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3722
Prosecution Insights