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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. The following claimed subject matter is not labelled: a base, a top, three faces, three edges, a leading edge. Therefore, the features 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 12, please first recite what “CVD” stands for prior to reciting the term.
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 1-20 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.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites a) “the at least one microfeature has at least three facets with at least three edges, each edge being between an adjacent pair of facets and extending from the base” and b) “wherein the at least three edges are not all a same length” and c) “wherein the at least one microfeature has a leading edge. If there are three facets with the edges being limited as claimed, it is unclear how the leading edge is further incorporated into the structure of the claimed invention. The leading edge would impart an additional structure which breaks apart the adjacency requirement of claim 1. Please amend claim 1 to clearly reflect the claimed structure.
Further regarding claim 1, the recitation of “the leading edge being either (i) coincident with the shortest edge from a top plan view of the at least three edges, or (ii) if two edges of the at least three edges from a top plan view are a same length but shorter than the other edges, halfway in rotation between each of the two edges and extending from the base of the microfeature to the top” renders the scope of the claimed invention indefinite. Firstly, “the shortest edge” lacks antecedent basis. Secondly, it is unclear how there are two edges comprising the leading edge and the shortest edge if the leading edge is specifically coincident with the shortest edge. Additionally, recitation of “if two edges of the at least three edges from a top plan view are a same length” contradicts the requirement of claim 1 imparting that “the at least three edges are not all a same length”. It is also unclear what is being imparted by “the other edges” and “halfway in rotation between each of the two edges and extending from the base of the microfeature to the top”. Lastly, it is unclear what is being structurally imparted in the recitation of “the leading edge of the at least one microfeature forms an angle of at least 5 degrees with a direction of instantaneous rotation of the pad conditioning disk”. Upon viewing the angle theta shown in instant Figure 1, Examiner acknowledges the presence of the angle, but it is unclear how this angle is determined, including the correlation with the instantaneous direction of rotation.
It is unclear what quantity of edges and structure is being imparted into the scope of claim 1, there are several recitations of edges, including “at least three edges”, “a leading edge”, “the shortest edge”, “two edges of the at least three edges…the other edges”. In an effort to further prosecution, Examiner has attempted to perform a prior art search in light of Figure 1 of the instant specification. Please amend claim 1 to clearly reflect the intended structure.
Independent claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons as explained in the rejection of claim 1 due to recitations of the same subject matter verbatim.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejection for the same reasons as stated above due to recitations of “wherein a leading edge of at least one microfeature of each of the at least two discrete abrasive elements forms a different angle with a direction of instantaneous rotation of the pad conditioning disk” in claim 18 and “wherein a leading edge of at least one microfeature of each of the at least two discrete abrasive elements forms a same angle with a direction of instantaneous rotation of the pad conditioning disk”. Lastly, claims 18 and 19 both recite “a leading edge”, which is antecedently recited and established in claim 17.
Any claim listed as rejected above but not specifically addressed above has inherited the rejection of a claim specifically addressed above due to dependency therefrom.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10, 13-15, 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lara Rodriguez (US 2020/0199425).
Regarding claim 1, Lara discloses a pad conditioning disk (see Figure 1A and 1C; see also [0029] disclosing the article 10 can be formed to be any suitable abrasive article, and wherein [0030] discloses the article can be a disc; see also [0105]), comprising:
at least one discrete abrasive element, the at least one discrete abrasive element comprising at least one microfeature having a base and a top (see at least Figure 1A, wherein there is a base and top 40 for each abrasive particle 16; see also [0177]);
wherein the at least one microfeature has at least three facets with at least three edges, each edge being between an adjacent pair of facets and extending from the base (see Figures 2A-2D, wherein there are at least four faces 20, 22, 24, 26 and six edges 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 39 of each embodiment of abrasive particle 16 shown; see [0032-0036]);
wherein the at least three edges are not all a same length (wherein [0032] discloses different edge lengths; see also [0169-0171]); and
wherein the at least one microfeature has a leading edge (wherein there are at least six edges as pointed out above), the leading edge being either
(i) coincident with the shortest edge from a top plan view of the at least three edges, or (ii) if two edges of the at least three edges from a top plan view are a same length but shorter than the other edges, halfway in rotation between each of the two edges and extending from the base of the microfeature to the top (please see at least Figures 2A-2D, as well as [0032-0036]; wherein given the differences in lengths as disclosed in [0032] and [0169-0171], the leading edge is defined by being coincident with the shortest edge; please also refer to the 112b rejection provided above);
wherein the at least one discrete abrasive element is oriented and disposed on the pad conditioning disk such that the leading edge of the at least one microfeature forms an angle of at least 5 degrees with a direction of instantaneous rotation of the pad conditioning disk (wherein [0048] discloses the orientation of the individual particles can be controlled to achieve any suitable orientation; see also the 112b rejection provided above; see also [0102]).
Regarding claim 2, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein the at least one microfeature has a truncated top (wherein upon viewing Figure 1A, see vertex 40; wherein [0037] discloses the vertex 40 of the particle(s) have a planar surface feature, i.e. a truncated top formed as a result of the vertex having the planar surface).
Regarding claim 3, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein the at least one microfeatures has four edges (see Figures 2A-2D, wherein there are at least four faces 20, 22, 24, 26 and six edges 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 39 of each embodiment of abrasive particle 16 shown; see [0032-0036]).
Regarding claim 4, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein the at least one microfeature is an array of microfeatures (see at least Figure 1B regarding the multiple abrasive particles 16; see also [0041-0043], [0102-0103]).
Regarding claim 5, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein each microfeature in the array of microfeatures is the same shape, size, and orientation (wherein [0040] discloses the particles 16 can have the same orientation; wherein [0039] discloses the particles 16 can be the same size; see also [0063] regarding shapes; see also [0032-0038], Figure 1B, [0048]).
Regarding claim 6, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein the array of microfeatures varies by at least one of shape, size, or orientation (see Figure 1C; see also [0038]: different shapes and/or sizes in combinations of abrasive particles 16; see also [0039-0041]).
Regarding claim 7, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein the at least one discrete element includes at least two discrete elements, and the at least two discrete elements each include at least one microfeature (see Figures 1A-1C; see the multiple abrasive particles 16), with a same size and shape but have different orientations relative to a respective reference point ([0039]: same size; wherein [0063] discloses the cavities which form the abrasive particles can have the same shape, i.e. the produced particles have the same shape; wherein [0040] discloses a portion of the abrasive particles can have the same orientation, i.e. there are abrasive particles oriented in a different direction; see also [0042]).
Regarding claim 8, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein the at least one discrete element is attached to the pad conditioning disk by an adhesive (see at least the adhesive disclosed in [0031]; see also [0004-0005], [0096], [0099]).
Regarding claim 10, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein the at least one discrete abrasive element includes at least five discrete abrasive elements (wherein as can be seen in Figures 1B and 1C, there are four abrasive particles 16 shown, however Figures 6 and 7 show the abrasive article and plurality of particles).
Regarding claim 13, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein the at least one microfeature of the at least one discrete abrasive element includes a ceramic material ([0093]: the abrasive particles are ceramic after sintering; see also [0051]).
Regarding claim 14, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein the at least one discrete abrasive element includes a working surface where the at least one microfeature is disposed and a carrier, wherein the carrier includes a metal substrate (see backing 12 as well as [0156] regarding the materials of the carrier; see also [0094-0096]).
Regarding claim 15, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein the pad conditioning disk includes a carrier where the at least one discrete abrasive element is disposed (see Figures 1B, 1C, backing 12).
Regarding claim 17, Lara discloses a method of forming a pad conditioning disk, comprising:
providing a carrier (see backing 12);
providing at least one discrete abrasive element, wherein the at least one discrete element includes at least one microfeature having a base and a top (see at least Figure 1A, wherein there is a base and top 40 for each abrasive particle 16; see also [0177]),
the microfeature including at least three facets with at least three edges, each edge being between an adjacent pair of facets and extending from the base (see Figures 2A-2D, wherein there are at least four faces 20, 22, 24, 26 and six edges 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 39 of each embodiment of abrasive particle 16 shown; see [0032-0036]),
wherein the at least three edges are not all a same length (wherein [0032] discloses different edge lengths; see also [0169-0171]), and wherein the at least one microfeature has a leading edge (wherein there are at least six edges as pointed out above), the leading edge being either
(i) coincident with the shortest edge of the at least three edges, or (ii) if two edges of the at least three edges are a same length but shorter than the other edges, halfway in rotation between each of the two edges and extending from the base of the microfeature to the top (please see at least Figures 2A-2D, as well as [0032-0036]; wherein given the differences in lengths as disclosed in [0032] and [0169-0171], the leading edge is defined by being coincident with the shortest edge; please also refer to the 112b rejection provided above),
orienting and disposing the at least one discrete abrasive element on the carrier such that the leading edge of the at least one microfeature forms an angle of at least 5 degrees with a direction of instantaneous rotation of the pad conditioning disk (wherein [0048] discloses the orientation of the individual particles can be controlled to achieve any suitable orientation; see also the 112b rejection provided above; see also [0102]).
Regarding claim 18, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein orienting and disposing the at least one discrete abrasive element includes orienting and disposing at least two discrete abrasive elements on the carrier, wherein a leading edge of at least one microfeature of each of the at least two discrete abrasive elements forms a different angle with a direction of instantaneous rotation of the pad conditioning disk (please refer to [0029], [0040-0042], [0048], [0102-0104], as well as the 112b rejection provided above).
Regarding claim 19, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses wherein orienting and disposing the at least one discrete abrasive element includes orienting and disposing at least two discrete abrasive elements on the carrier, wherein a leading edge of at least one microfeature of each of the at least two discrete abrasive elements forms a same angle with a direction of instantaneous rotation of the pad conditioning disk (please refer to [0029], [0040-0042], [0048], [0102-0104], as well as the 112b rejection provided above).
Regarding claim 20, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Lara further discloses repositioning at least one discrete abrasive element (see [0101-0103]).
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lara Rodriguez (US 2020/0199425) in view of Eilers (US 2015/0126098).
Regarding claim 9, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above. However, Lara does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one discrete element is repositionably attached to the pad conditioning disk.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Eilers teaches wherein the at least one discrete element is repositionably attached to the pad conditioning disk ([0086]: wherein the backing 102, which supports the abrasive particles, is attached to the plate of a power tool by a hook and loop attachment system).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the hook and loop attaching feature as taught by Eilers into the invention of Lara. One would be motivated to do so in order to ensure a user can conveniently replace or remove the article when deemed necessary (Eilers: [0086]).
Claim(s) 11, 12, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lara Rodriguez (US 2020/0199425) in view of Lehuu (US 20150209933).
Regarding claim 11, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above. However, Lara does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one microfeature of the at least one discrete abrasive element includes superabrasive grit.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Lehuu teaches wherein the at least one microfeature of the at least one discrete abrasive element includes superabrasive grit (see [0027]: CVD diamond or CBN; see also [0028], [0122], [0129]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the material as taught by Lehuu into the invention of Lara. One would be motivated to do so because the material taught by Lehuu have excellent durability, increase wear resistance, and protect from corrosion ([0027-0028] of Lehuu).
Regarding claim 12, Lara in view of Lehuu teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified Lara further teaches wherein the at least one microfeature of the at least one discrete abrasive element includes CVD diamond (see the combination statement as applied to claim 11 above, as well as Lehuu: [0027-0028], [0122], [0129]).
Regarding claim 16, Lara discloses the claimed invention as applied above. However, Lara does not explicitly teach wherein the carrier of the pad conditioning disk is stainless steel.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Lehuu teaches wherein the carrier of the pad conditioning disk is stainless steel ([0036]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the carrier material as taught by Lehuu into the invention of Lara. Lehuu suggests stainless steel as an option selected from metals, ceramics, polymers, cermet, silicon, and composites, i.e. overlapping with the subject matter of Lara, and wherein Lara contemplates and suggests alternatives (see [0030]). One would be motivated to select the material of Lehuu to provide a carrier which has sufficient rigidity for performing abrasive operations, and both Lehuu and Lara suggest alternatives which overlap with one another.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAKENA S MARKMAN whose telephone number is (469)295-9162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 am-6:00pm.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/MAKENA S MARKMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights