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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 14 August 2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 14 August 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that all groups fo claims are sufficiently related to each other that an undue burden would not be placed upon the Examiner by mainlining all groups in a single application. This is not found persuasive because the groups are directed towards a method for calibration of a dressing spindle and a machine tool for grinding a workpiece. While a workpiece may require a calibration, the steps for calibration would not need to be those which are claimed in Group I and therefore any examination of Group I would not inherently encompass the tool itself and its operation of Group II. Therefore, burden exists in the examination of both Groups as they require different search strategies and classifications.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “can be” which appears for example in the first few lines of the claim should be changed to “capable of” or similar language for clarity, as the term “can be” could be interpreted as indefinite.
In section b. the term “in parallel” should be changed to simply “parallel” for clarity.
In section d. the phrase “by a processing unit” should be changed to “with a processing unit” for clarity.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “can be” which appears for example in the first few lines of the claim should be changed to “capable of” or similar language for clarity, as the term “can be” could be interpreted as indefinite.
The claim further comprises the limitations of dressing the grinding tool “by the” dressing tool and grinding the workpiece “by the” dressed grinding tool. In each instance, the term “by the” should be changed to “with” for clarity.
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 1-9 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, the claim recites the limitation of “the machining area” in line 2. It is unclear as to where this machining area is located since no such area has been disclosed or described previously.
In step d. of the method, the term “vertical direction” has not been defined as to what would be “vertical.” For example, would the vertical direction be the direction extending upwards perpendicularly from the axial axis, or from a ground surface, etc.
The claim recites in step e. the limitation of a calibration sphere, however it is not clear as to what the calibration sphere comprises or how is it used in the method. Additionally, the claim recites that the sphere is “concentrically arranged” with the dressing spindle, however no reference to an axis or center which could be shared has been disclosed. It is assumed that the sphere is arranged to align with the axial axis of the dressing spindle itself.
Step h. of the claim refers to “the measured polarity of calibration sphere positions,” however the only plurality of positions that has been previously disclosed is the “plurality of positions on the jig” in step g. It is therefore not clear if these are the same positions or not.
In step i. it is not clear as to what is meant by “the dimension of the calibration sphere.”
Regarding claim 4, the claim recites the phrase “in particular” which is indefinite as it is not clear if the limitations that follow are required by the claim or not.
Regarding claim 7, the claim recites that the calibration sphere “is first applied for determining a primary center position” however it is not clear as to what is meant by “applied” and what it is applied to. Additionally, it is not clear as to what the primary center position is of.
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites the limitation that the height fo the calibration sphere “is considered” for determining the referencing point, however it is not clear as to what this limitation means or how the consideration is applied to the method.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 may be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: as best interpreted, the prior art of record fails to teach the limitations of the method as found in independent claim 1 for calibrating a dressing spindle by using a measuring device to contact the body of a test mandrel mounted on a dressing spindle, determining a tilt angle of the rotation axis of the dressing spindle and mounting a calibration sphere having a connecting portion an a jig on the top of the connecting portion on the dressing spindle, contacting, with a touch probe mounted on the main spindle of the machine spool, a plurality of positions on the jig and determining a center position of the calibration sphere in accordance with the measured plurality of calibration sphere positions and determining a referencing point of the dressing spindle. The prior art cited, including Schweizer, Stollberg and Janutta teach dressing spindles and operation thereof but do not explicitly teach the calibration method as disclosed by the present application and detailed above. As claims 2-9 depend from claim 1, they are deemed allowable for the same reasons due to their dependency thereon.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mark A. Shabman whose telephone number is (571)272-8589. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30 EST.
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, Laura Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
/MARK A SHABMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights