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 .
Applicant's submission filed on 01/27/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3 and 5-14 are still pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 10 that in contrast, according to claim 12, Discenzo does not explicitly or inherently disclose the display unit emphasizes and displays a motion command of an actuator or a machine on which a motion limitation is imposed.
The examiner respectfully disagrees because Discenzo discloses the lubricant creates a dissipative or damping force that resists the motion of the energized finger-like elements as mentioned in column 5, lines 65-67, column 6, lines 1-8. Therefore, it is understood that lubricant causes the motion to be limited. Furthermore, Discenzo also discloses a user to enter data, information, function commands, etc. as is conventional. For example, the user may input information relating to lubricant type via the keypad 98 for subsequent transmission to a host computer 102 in column 7, lines 11-27. Therefore, Discenzo discloses all the limitations of claim 12.
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.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Discenzo et al. US 6,023,961.
Regarding claim 12, Discenzo et al. disclose
A display device (Fig. 3, item 90) comprising a display unit (Item 92) that emphasizes and displays a motion command (Function commands) of an actuator or a machine (Item 90) on which a motion limitation is imposed when a state is determined to be a temperature state where the motion limitation is to be imposed on the machine (Column 7, lines 10-27, column 9, lines 25-53).
Regarding claim 13, Discenzo et al. disclose
, wherein the display unit displays an upper limit value of motion of the actuator or the machine near the motion command of the actuator or the machine (Column 7, lines 11-27, column 9, lines 25-63).
Regarding claim 14, Discenzo et al. disclose
, wherein the display unit further displays a temperature state of a lubricant of the actuator (Column 9, lines 63).
REASONS FOR ALLOWANCE
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claims 1-3 and 5-11 are allowed.
Upon further consideration and in a view of the limitation, the prior art does not explicitly teach or fairly suggest alone or in combination of “wherein the control unit is configured to impose the motion limitation on the machine, based on a change amount of the viscous frictional force between the detected temperature and the reference temperature.” in claims 1 and 11.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BICKEY DHAKAL whose telephone number is (571)272-3577. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-4:30 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, Jessica Han can be reached at 5712722078. 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.
/BICKEY DHAKAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights