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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the colon at the end of line 2 should be removed. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 13, 21-22, 25, and 27-28 are objected to because of the following informalities: the leading letters in parentheses and leading dashes should be removed. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 25 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 6, “5” should be removed. 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 23, 30, 33, and 37 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.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "workpiece spindle" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The workpiece spindle is first introduced in Claim 22, not Claim 21.
In Claim 33, it is unclear what the differences are between the rotationally movable limitations, if any.
In Claims 30 and 37, it is unclear how hard fine is defined. The orig. spec. adds no guidance to defining hard fine.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 10-15, 19, 21, 23-24, 30-32, 34, 35, and 37, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deprez et al. (US 4264247) (“DeprezA”) in view of Deprez et al., column 6, lines 21-24 (US 4264247) (“DeprezB”). These rejections are based on the PCT/EP2022/083889 rejections.
DeprezA discloses:
Claim 1: (a) a base (FIG. 1/4, 62/64),
(b) a carrier (66) which is arranged on the base and which is rotatable about a first axis of rotation (32) with respect to the base (col. 6, lines 3-32),
(c) a gripping device (16) arranged on the carrier for gripping and releasing the workpiece, wherein
(d) the gripping device has at least two gripper arms (68) which are each pivotable independently of one another
(d1) the gripper arms are pivotable relative to one another
(d2) the gripper arms are pivotable
Claim 2: wherein a workpiece spindle for rotating the workpiece is arranged on the carrier, the gripping device configured to load and unload the workpiece spindle with a workpiece (FIG. 1-4);
Claim 3: wherein the gripping device is axially movable along the second axis of rotation (at least col. 3, lines 58-66);
Claim 4: wherein the second axis of rotation is displaced parallel with respect to the first axis of rotation (at least col. 3, lines 58-66);
Claim 5: wherein the gripping device is configured to grip or release a workpiece independently of the position or rotational movement of the carrier (FIG. 1-4);
Claim 10: wherein at least one gripper is arranged on each of the gripper arms and the grippers are configured to exert a clamping force on the workpiece in the gripping position (FIG. 1-4; clamping);
Claim 11: wherein the gripping device is configured so that several workpieces can be gripped simultaneously by the gripping device (FIG. 1-4);
Claim 12: wherein the at least two gripper arms comprise a first gripper arm, a second gripper arm and a third gripper arm, the second gripper arm being provided in the circumferential direction of the second axis of rotation between the first gripper arm and the third gripper arm (FIG. 1-4);
Claim 13: wherein the gripping device is configured in such a way that the second gripper arm can assume a gripping position or a release position relative to the first gripper arm, and can assume a gripping position or a release position relative to the third gripper arm (FIG. 1-4);
Claim 14: wherein the carrier is rotatable about the first axis of rotation in such a way that the carrier can be rotated back and forth between an operating position, in which the machine tool can be loaded and unloaded with the workpiece by the device, and a maintenance position, in which the machine tool and/or the device can be maintained and/or manually loaded (FIG. 1-4 shows that the claimed structures are capable of being in these positions);
Claim 15: wherein the carrier has a vertically arranged carrier tower, the gripping device being arranged on an outer lateral surface of the carrier tower (62/etc.);
Claim 19: comprising a centering device for centering the workpiece (centering devices shown and not labeled at least in FIG. 2 at B/C);
Claim 21: a machine housing (64),
a grinding device (24) arranged on the machine housing for grinding the workpiece (col. 2, lines 38-54 and col. 3, lines 17/23),
a device according to claim 1 for loading the machine tool with a workpiece (FIG. 1-4),
wherein the machine housing of the grinding machine is the base of the device (FIG. 1-4);
Claim 23: wherein the carrier is rotatable about the first axis of rotation in such a way that the carrier assumes an access position in which a user can access the workpiece spindle (user can access in FIG. 1-4; 76/18);
Claim 30: wherein the machine tool for machining gears is a hard fine machining machine (22/24);
Claim 32: wherein at least one gripper is arranged on each of the gripper arms and the grippers have a protrusion for gripping underneath the workpiece (L-shaped 68 with gripping underneath the workpiece in FIG. 1/4);
Claim 34: wherein the centering device is a tailstock (centering devices shown and not labeled at least in FIG. 2 at B/C are supports for adjusting gears/workpieces);
Claim 35: wherein the centering device is configured to center the workpiece on the workpiece spindle (centering devices shown and not labeled at least in FIG. 2 at B/C are supports for centering on/at at least 12/18/76);
Claim 37: wherein the machine tool is configured for hard fine machining of a pre-toothed workpiece (22/24).
DeprezA does not directly show:
Claim 1: pivoting as claimed about a second axis of rotation;
Claim 6: wherein the gripping device comprises a drive setup configured to drive the gripper arms independently of one another;
Claim 7: wherein the drive setup comprises a plurality of drives, each drive being assigned to a respective gripper arm;
Claim 24: wherein the at least two gripper arms comprises a first gripper arm, a second gripper arm and a third gripper arm;
Claim 31: wherein the plurality of drives is a plurality of synchronous motors and wherein each synchronous motor is assigned to a respective gripper arm.
DeprezB shows a similar device having:
Claim 1: pivoting as claimed about a second axis of rotation (column 6, lines 21-24; DeprezB suggests letting the three different gripping arms (68) rotate about the same rotation point (74));
Claim 6: wherein the gripping device comprises a drive setup configured to drive the gripper arms independently of one another (column 6, lines 21-24; DeprezB suggests letting the three different gripping arms (68) rotate about the same rotation point (74) which implies a hydraulic drive setup);
Claim 7: wherein the drive setup comprises a plurality of drives, each drive being assigned to a respective gripper arm (column 6, lines 21-24; DeprezB suggests letting the three different gripping arms (68) rotate about the same rotation point (74) which implies a hydraulic drive setup with plurality of drives);
Claim 24: wherein the at least two gripper arms comprises a first gripper arm, a second gripper arm and a third gripper arm (column 6, lines 21-24; DeprezB suggests letting the three different gripping arms (68) rotate about the same rotation point (74));
Claim 31: wherein the plurality of drives is a plurality of synchronous motors and wherein each synchronous motor is assigned to a respective gripper arm (column 6, lines 21-24; DeprezB suggests letting the three different gripping arms (68) rotate about the same rotation point (74) which implies a hydraulic drive setup with plurality of drives that move synchronously);
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of efficiently and reliably manufacturing workpieces, or gears (col. 2, lines 4-13). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify DeprezA as taught by DeprezB and include DeprezB’s similar device having:
Claim 1: pivoting as claimed about a second axis of rotation;
Claim 6: wherein the gripping device comprises a drive setup configured to drive the gripper arms independently of one another;
Claim 7: wherein the drive setup comprises a plurality of drives, each drive being assigned to a respective gripper arm;
Claim 24: wherein the at least two gripper arms comprises a first gripper arm, a second gripper arm and a third gripper arm;
Claim 31: wherein the plurality of drives is a plurality of synchronous motors and wherein each synchronous motor is assigned to a respective gripper arm;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of efficiently and reliably manufacturing workpieces, or gears.
Claim(s) 16-18, 22, and 33, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeprezA in view of DeprezB and Kato et al. (US 9821392) (“Kato”). These rejections are based on the PCT/EP2022/083889 rejections. DeprezA discloses all the limitations of the claims as discussed above.
DeprezA does not directly show:
Claim 16: wherein a dressing device for dressing an abrasive of the machine tool is arranged on the carrier;
Claim 17: wherein the dressing device is movable in relation to the carrier;
Claim 33: wherein the dressing device is translationally movable, rotationally movable or translationally as well as rotationally movable in relation to the carrier;
Claim 18: wherein a profiling device for pre-profiling an abrasive of the machine tool is arranged on the carrier;
Claim 22: wherein a dressing device for dressing an abrasive of the grinding device is arranged on the carrier, a workpiece spindle for rotating the workpiece about a third axis of rotation is arranged on the carrier, and the carrier can be rotated about the first axis of rotation in such a way that the carrier can be rotated back and forth between a grinding position, in which the workpiece spindle faces the grinding device, and a maintenance position, in which the dressing device faces the grinding device.
Kato shows a similar device having:
Claim 16: wherein a dressing device for dressing an abrasive of the machine tool is arranged on the carrier (52/etc.; col. 4, lines 1-17 suggest the claimed limitations);
Claim 17: wherein the dressing device is movable in relation to the carrier (col. 4, lines 1-17 suggest the claimed limitations);
Claim 33: wherein the dressing device is translationally movable, rotationally movable or translationally as well as rotationally movable in relation to the carrier (rotationally movable; col. 4, lines 1-17 suggest the claimed limitations);
Claim 18: wherein a profiling device for pre-profiling an abrasive of the machine tool is arranged on the carrier (col. 4, lines 1-17 suggest the claimed limitations);
Claim 22: wherein a dressing device for dressing an abrasive of the grinding device is arranged on the carrier, a workpiece spindle for rotating the workpiece about a third axis of rotation is arranged on the carrier, and the carrier can be rotated about the first axis of rotation in such a way that the carrier can be rotated back and forth between a grinding position, in which the workpiece spindle faces the grinding device, and a maintenance position, in which the dressing device faces the grinding device (col. 4, lines 1-17 suggest the claimed limitations);
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of efficiently producing gears and/or reduce/prevent unevenness of gear teeth (col. 3, lines 51-60). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify DeprezA and DeprezB as taught by Kato and include Kato’s similar device having:
Claim 16: wherein a dressing device for dressing an abrasive of the machine tool is arranged on the carrier;
Claim 17: wherein the dressing device is movable in relation to the carrier;
Claim 33: wherein the dressing device is translationally movable, rotationally movable or translationally as well as rotationally movable in relation to the carrier;
Claim 18: wherein a profiling device for pre-profiling an abrasive of the machine tool is arranged on the carrier;
Claim 22: wherein a dressing device for dressing an abrasive of the grinding device is arranged on the carrier, a workpiece spindle for rotating the workpiece about a third axis of rotation is arranged on the carrier, and the carrier can be rotated about the first axis of rotation in such a way that the carrier can be rotated back and forth between a grinding position, in which the workpiece spindle faces the grinding device, and a maintenance position, in which the dressing device faces the grinding device;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of efficiently producing gears and/or reduce/prevent unevenness of gear teeth.
Claim(s) 20 and 36, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeprezA in view of DeprezB, and Kurashiki et al. (US 2010/0041314) (“Kurashiki”). These rejections are based on the PCT/EP2022/083889 rejections. DeprezA discloses all the limitations of the claims as discussed above.
DeprezA does not directly show:
Claim 20: a position-determining device for determining a position of the workpiece, the position determining device comprising at least one sensor;
Claim 36: wherein the position-determining device is configured to determine a position of at least one tooth space of the workpiece.
Kurashiki shows a similar device having:
Claim 20: a position-determining device for determining a position of the workpiece, the position determining device comprising at least one sensor (para. [0031);
Claim 36: wherein the position-determining device is configured to determine a position of at least one tooth space of the workpiece (para. [0031);
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of detecting the rotational phase of the workpiece for inspection of the workpiece to determine if maintenance of the apparatus/machine tool is needed (para. [0031). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify DeprezA and DeprezB as taught by Kurashiki and include Kurashiki’s similar device having:
Claim 20: a position-determining device for determining a position of the workpiece, the position determining device comprising at least one sensor;
Claim 36: wherein the position-determining device is configured to determine a position of at least one tooth space of the workpiece;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of detecting the rotational phase of the workpiece for inspection of the workpiece to determine if maintenance of the apparatus/machine tool is needed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 and 25-29 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose a drive ring as claimed in Claim 8. The prior art does not disclose that the third gripper arm is pivoted about the second axis of rotation in such a way that the third gripper arm follows the second gripper arm synchronously as claimed in Claim 25. Claim 9 depends on Claim 8; Claims 26-29 depend on Claim 25 directly or indirectly.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 4013176 discloses grippers 128/134.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gerald McClain whose telephone number is (571)272-7803. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and at gerald.mcclain@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03 (II)).
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272-7097. 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.
/Gerald McClain/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights