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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I, claims 1-12 and 18 in the reply filed on 15 July 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there would be no burden for the Examiner to examine the non-elected invention. This is not found persuasive because the non-elected invention at least requires searching in G05B 19/18 and G05B 2219/45215, which are not required for the elected invention.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 13-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 15 July 2026.
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 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 1-3, 9, 11-12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iwagaya (US 4,985,841).
Regarding claim 1, Iwagaya discloses a thread machining apparatus (machine tool, not shown), comprising: a spindle motor 1 adapted to drive a thread tool 21 coupled to an output shaft (not shown, connects spindle motor to tool holder 20) of the spindle motor to rotate at a rotational speed; and a feeding device 2 (AC servomotor) movably coupled to the spindle motor and configured to drive the spindle motor to move along an axial direction of the spindle motor at a moving speed; wherein during thread machining, the moving speed is proportional to the rotational speed (“forward rotation of the spindle motor 1 and the servomotor 2 is synchronized with each other and at a required rotational speed ratio”; “the tap 21 is axially driven by the distance iP for each revolution thereof, thereby effecting the tapping work with the pitch provided by the working program”; “wherein said digital spindle motor and said servomotor are driven with a predetermined rotational speed ratio corresponding to said pitch value of said screw”).
Regarding claim 2, Iwagaya discloses wherein a ratio of the moving speed to the rotational speed is equal to a pitch of the thread tool 21 (“wherein said digital spindle motor and said servomotor are driven with a predetermined rotational speed ratio corresponding to said pitch value of said screw”, i.e., the pitch of the thread tool forming the pitch of the screw).
Regarding claim 3, Iwagaya discloses wherein the feeding device 2 comprises: a servo motor 2; and a transmission device (not shown but inherent for moving the tap axially by the servo motor) coupled to an output shaft of the servo motor and configured to convert the rotation of the output shaft of the servo motor into a linear movement along the axial direction of the spindle motor to drive the spindle motor (“The spindle motor 1 for importing tool rotation and the servomotor 2 for tool feed are then rotated forwardly, thereby effecting tapping for a predetermined distance d1 in a tapping direction”).
Regarding claim 9, Iwagaya discloses further comprising: a positioning mechanism 4 fixedly coupled to the feeding device 2 and adapted to position the feeding device to align the thread tool 21 with a hole of a thread to be machined of the workpiece (“The respective rotational positions of the motors 1 and 2, that is, the rotational position and the axial position of the tap 21, correspond entirely to each other. Even though the spindle motor 1 and the servomotor 2 are rotated in either direction, the aforesaid predetermined positional relationship is maintained continually, thereby permitting accurate tapping work.”).
Regarding claim 11, Iwagaya discloses wherein the spindle motor 1 comprises: a clamping part 20 adapted to hold the thread tool 21; a controller 5a adapted to control the rotational speed of the spindle motor; and an encoder 3 coupled to the controller and configured to transmit the rotation number of the spindle motor to the controller of the spindle motor in a speed control mode, so that the controller controls the rotational speed of the spindle motor; and transmit the position (assisted by the position control means 4) of the clamping part of the spindle motor holding the thread tool in a position control mode, so as to control the output shaft of the spindle motor to rotate to a predetermined position to replace the thread tool (“the digital spindle motor for rotating the tap and the servomotor for axially moving the tap are driven individually in response to the distributed pulses linearly interpolated by, the interpolating, circuit. The two motors are synchronized so that the rotational position and the axial position of the tap correspond to each other. After the predetermined tapping work is finished, the tap is retracted through the distance less than the predetermined amount” and “The tool holder 20 is replaceably fitted with a plurality of tools, such as the tap 20 and a milling cutter (not shown), by means of an automatic tool replacer”).
Regarding claim 12, Iwagaya discloses wherein the thread tool 21 comprises a tap 21.
Regarding claim 18, Iwagaya discloses a thread machining system comprising a thread machining apparatus according to claim 1.
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 of this title, 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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwagaya in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2009/0257837 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Iwagaya discloses the invention substantially as claimed, except Iwagaya does not disclose wherein the positioning mechanism comprises a robot, and wherein the feeding device is fixedly coupled to an end of a mechanical arm of the robot. Takahashi et al. teaches the use of a thread machining apparatus 10 that comprises a positioning mechanism that includes a robot 13 with a robot arm 11 that is used for positioning a tap 20 for the purpose of improving processing efficiency of a threading step performed by the apparatus. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have combined the apparatus of Iwagaya with the robot and robot arm of Takahashi et al. in order to improve the processing efficiency of the threading operation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-8 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Maeda (US 2022/0161341 A1) discloses a threading apparatus that uses a controller with an encoder system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC ANDREW GATES whose telephone number is (571)272-5498. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 9-6, Alt Fr 9-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sunil Singh, can be reached on 571-272-3460. 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.
/ERIC A. GATES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722 13 August 2026
Prosecution Insights