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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the roller guide in Fig. 3 as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). According to the specification, Figs. 3a and 3b show the stand from Fig. 1A and Fig. 1B also shows the stand from Fig. 1B. Fig. 1B shows the roller guide adjustment connector 64 and universal shaft 62 on the side of the stand. As Fig. 3 shows the same stand, the roller guide adjustment connector 64 and universal shaft 62 should still be shown on the side of the stand.
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 Interpretation
Claim 1 include the phrase “regular hexagon”. Examiner notes 1.) that this term is known in the art to mean an equiangular and equilateral hexagon, but 2.) applicant has clearly redefined the claim term to mean “a polygon having at least six sides and corners” wherein the corner don’t have to be sharp, but can have “roundings, chamfers or similar transitions” (spec., Pg. 4, Lines 14-17).
Examiner also notes that that a 60° rotation between adjacent sides implies that there are only 6 sides as more than 6 sides would lead to a smaller angle of rotation.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ralf (DE102020206535) in view of Cattaneo et al. (US 5,765,423), hereinafter referred to as Cattaneo.
Re Claim 1, Ralf discloses a stand (rolling stand 1) for rolling metal rods, wires, or pipes, along a rolling axis, comprising:
three rollers (three rolls 3) located on a respective roller shaft (“The torque is transmitted to the roller 3 via a coupling half 6, which is mounted non-rotatably on a roller shaft 7” [0048]) and the three rollers surrounding the rolling axis in a star-shaped manner collectively forming a caliber (“three rolls 3 are arranged in a star shape, enclosing a rolling axis 4 and defining a caliber by their mutual distance or the distance from the central rolling axis 4” [0048]);
a stand housing (stand housing 2) having an outside comprising at least six side surfaces (see Fig. 1, first illustration below), and two end faces that are opposite one another (see Fig. 1, first illustration below); and
PNG
media_image1.png
867
1299
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Ralf, first illustration
a roller guide (adjusting device 17) attached to one of the end faces of the stand housing (adjusting device 17 is attached to the end face of the stand housing via the side surface of the stand housing), the roller guide comprising a universal shaft (shaft 18), wherein the universal shaft comprises a roller adjustment connector (bevel gear 14) configured to enable a central adjustment of the roller guide (“A key for turning the shaft 18, the bevel gear 19 and thus also the associated eccentric bushing 14 via the toothed segment 20 can be attached to a coupling piece 21 which is non-rotatably connected to the shaft 18. Since this - like all eccentric bushings 14 - is connected to the associated eccentric bushing 15 in a rotationally fixed and space-holding manner via a connecting bracket 22 encompassing the roller 3, and the tooth segments 16 transmit the rotary movement to the eccentric bushings 14 , 15 of all roller shafts 7, all eccentric bushings 14 , 15 and thus the rollers 3 are adjusted synchronously in the radial direction and the caliber is changed.” [0051]).
Ralf fails to disclose a stand housing having an outside comprising at least six side surfaces disposed about the rolling axis that are arranged so as to be offset about the rolling axis by a 60° rotation between adjacent side surfaces, wherein the side surfaces form a regular hexagon, and wherein the roller adjustment connector is attached to the stand housing in a corner of the hexagon.
Cattaneo teaches a stand housing (enclosing roll carrier 10) having an outside comprising at least six side surfaces (see Fig. 3, illustrated below) when viewed along the rolling axis that are arranged so as to be offset about the rolling axis by a 60° rotation between adjacent side surfaces (see Fig. 3, illustrated below), wherein the side surfaces form a regular hexagon (see Fig. 3, illustrated below).
PNG
media_image2.png
876
1208
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3, of Cattaneo
Ralf and Cattaneo include each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single reference. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the Ralf and Cattaneo by using a hexagonal stand housing in Ralf as done in Cattaneo and, that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. Examiner notes that once the combination is made the roller adjustment connector will be attached to the stand housing in a corner of the hexagon if the alignment between the adjusting device and rollers of Ralf is maintained. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Re Claim 2, Ralf, in view of Cattaneo, discloses the stand according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), and further discloses that the stand housing comprises at least one pair of coupling clamping regions (See Fig. 1 of Ralf, second illustration below. third coupling clamping region) arranged in one corner of the hexagon and on which the roller adjustment connector is attached (See Fig. 1 of Ralf, second illustration below), wherein a first coupling clamping region of the pair is arranged on one of the end faces (Third Coupling Clamping region has one region arranged on one end face and one region arranged opposing on the opposite end face) and a second coupling clamping region of the pair is arranged on the other of the end faces (Third Coupling Clamping region has one region arranged on one end face and one region arranged opposing on the opposite end face).
PNG
media_image3.png
867
1299
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Ralf, Second Illustration
Re Claim 3, Ralf, in view of Cattaneo, discloses the stand according to claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above), wherein the at least one pair of coupling clamping regions comprises two pairs of coupling clamping regions, a first pair of coupling clamping regions arranged in one corner of the hexagon (third coupling clamp region. See Fig. 1 of Ralf, second illustration above) and a second pair of coupling clamping regions arranged in a corner of the hexagon offset about the rolling axis by a 120° rotation from the corner of the first pair of coupling clamping regions (first coupling clamp region. See Fig. 1 of Ralf, second illustration above), wherein the roller adjustment connector is attached to one of said pairs (adjusting device 17 is attached to third coupling clamp region).
Re Claim 4, Ralf, in view of Cattaneo, discloses the stand according to claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above), wherein the at least one pair of coupling clamping regions comprises three pairs of coupling clamping regions, a first pair of the pairs of coupling clamping regions arranged in one corner of the hexagon (second coupling clamp region. See Fig. 1 of Ralf, second illustration above) and the other two pairs of coupling clamping regions arranged in corners adjacent to the corner of the first pair (first and third coupling clamp region. See Fig. 1 of Ralf, second illustration above), wherein the roller adjustment connector is attached to one of said pairs (adjusting device 17 is attached to third coupling clamp region).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ralf, in view of Cattaneo, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cernuschi et al. (WO2017/068533), hereinafter referred to as Cernuschi.
Re Claim 5, Ralf, in view of Cattaneo, discloses the stand according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), but fails to disclose that the stand housing comprises at least one operating material connection on at least one of the end faces, and wherein the roller guide comprises an operating material line connected to the operating material connection on the stand housing.
Cernushi teaches that the stand housing (stand 25) comprises at least one operating material connection (end nozzles 177) on at least one of the end faces (Fig. 9), and wherein the roller guide comprises an operating material line (cooling circuit 170) connected to the operating material connection on the stand housing (Fig. 9).
Ralf, in view of Cattaneo, disclose a stand upon which the claimed invention improves by adding a operating material line and connection. Cernushi teaches an operating material line and connection by its cooling system comprising of an intake, cooling circuit, and nozzles to eject coolant close to the rollers (Pg. 14, Lines 19-23). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have applied, in the same way, the known cooling system of Cernushi to the base stand of Ralf, in view of Cattaneo and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the results as predictable.
Claim(s) 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ralf, in view of Cattaneo, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Inslee (US 2,094,920).
Re Claim 6, Ralf, in view of Cattaneo, discloses the stand according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), but fails to disclose comprising an adjustment connector for introducing an adjustment torque, the adjustment connector configured to adjust a radial position of the roller shafts such that the caliber is set.
Inslee teaches an adjustment connector (member 40, link 41, screw 43, and wrench head 45) for introducing an adjustment torque, the adjustment connector configured to adjust a radial position of the roller shafts such that the caliber is set (“Each of the roll carriers is held against pivotal movement by means of a screw operated member 40 and a link 41 which serve also as adjusting means to give desired movement to the carrier for adjusting its roll toward and away from the pass line” Col. 3, Line 72 – Col. 4, Line 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ralf, in view of Cattaneo, to incorporate the adjustment connector as taught by Inslee to adjust the roller towards and away from the material to be rolled. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized a reasonable expectation of success.
Re Claim 7, Ralf, in view of Cattaneo and Inslee, disclose the stand according to claim 6 (see rejection of claim 6 above), and further discloses that the adjustment connector is arranged on the outside of the stand housing (Inslee, Fig. 1 shows the wrench head 45 is arranged on the outside of peripheral walls 18) in one of the corners of the regular hexagon (After modification, the adjustment connector will be arranged in one of the corners of the hexagon to keep the same angle between the adjustment connector of Inslee and roller shaft of Ralf that the adjustment connector of Inslee had with the spindle 31 of Inslee).
Re Claim 8, Ralf, in view of Cattaneo and Inslee, disclose the stand according to claim 6 (see rejection of claim 6 above), wherein the adjustment connector is manually actuatable (“The screw 43 has at its outer end a suitable wrench head 45 or is otherwise formed so that It may be turned from outside the casing to move the member 40 inward or outward and thereby to give the desired turning movement to the roll carrier about Its pivotal axis”. Col 4, Lines 13-19. A wrench is a form of manual actuation).
Re Claim 9, Ralf, in view of Cattaneo and Inslee, disclose the stand according to claim 6 (see rejection of claim 6 above), wherein the adjustment connector is a remote adjustment connector (“The screw 43 has at its outer end a suitable wrench head 45 or is otherwise formed so that It may be turned from outside the casing to move the member 40 inward or outward and thereby to give the desired turning movement to the roll carrier about Its pivotal axis”. Col 4, Lines 13-19. A wrench is a remote adjustment connector).
Re Claim 10, Ralf, in view of Cattaneo and Inslee, disclose the stand according to claim 9 (see rejection of claim 9 above), wherein the adjustment connector is manually actuatable (“The screw 43 has at its outer end a suitable wrench head 45 or is otherwise formed so that It may be turned from outside the casing to move the member 40 inward or outward and thereby to give the desired turning movement to the roll carrier about Its pivotal axis”. Col 4, Lines 13-19. A wrench is a form of manual actuation) or wherein the remote adjustment connector is automatically actuatable by a motor.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see “Objections”, filed September 4th, 2026, with respect to the drawing objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a different drawing objection is made and explained.
Applicant's arguments filed September 4th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued:
“In the Office Action, the Examiner asserts that Dedeken teaches a rolling stand including a stand housing 2 and a roller guide 17. However, the alleged roller guide of Dedeken is the "adjusting device 17" as described therein. The adjusting device 17 adjusts the rollers of Dedeken, but the adjusting device 17 is not a roller guide.
In the present application, the term "roller guide" is defined in paragraphs [0010]-[0013] as an element used to prevent the material to be rolled from performing a torsional movement between successive stands. The adjusting device 17 of Dedeken does not perform this function, and thus, does not teach the roller guide set forth in the present claims.
Because Dedeken does not teach a roller guide, Dedeken cannot teach or suggest a roller guide attached to one end face of the stand housing, a roller adjustment connector for such a roller guide, nor attachment of the roller adjustment connector to the stand housing, all of which are set forth in amended claim 1.
The other cited references, namely, Cattaneo, Cernuschi, and Inslee, do not resolve the deficiencies of Dedeken and have only been cited for allegedly teaching other features.”
First, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “an element used to prevent the material to be rolled from performing a torsional movement between successive stands”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Second, Examiner disputes Applicant’s characterization that “roller guide” has been defined in paragraphs [0010]-[0013] as “an element used to prevent the material to be rolled from performing a torsional movement between successive stands”. In paragraphs [0010]-[0013], which are part of Applicant’s background, Applicant says that there are roller guides known in the prior art capable of accomplishing two functions: preventing torsional movement and adjusting the caliber. In these paragraphs, applicant does not define “roller guide” as used in the disclosure of their invention as structure capable of performing either of the two functions, Applicant merely highlights the capabilities of prior art roller guides. Examiner notes that the claims define the roller guide as capable of adjusting the caliber (Claim 1, “configured to enable a central adjustment of the roller guide”), but do not define the roller guide as capable of preventing torsional movement.
Third, examiner notes that the term “roller guide”, as used in the art, does not use Applicant’s definition. In Trubert (US2013/0160513), the roller guide (roller guide structure 500) appears to refer to the housing that supports the rollers. In Takeda et al. (US 6,442,989), roller guide appears to refer to the rollers themselves (“a roller guide having four guide rollers”).
Applicant neither redefined the term “roller guide” nor invoked 112(f) so Examiner could rely on limitations present in the specification. The specification is unclear whether “roller guide” requires structure that prevents torsional movement. The term does not have inherent structural meaning in the prior art. As is, the claims define roller guide as comprising a universal shaft which itself comprises a roller adjustment connector. Dedeken discloses the claimed structure which performs the claimed function.
Applicant further argued:
“Furthermore, the Examiner asserts that Cattaneo teaches or suggests a stand housing having six side surfaces on an outside thereof. However, the alleged side surfaces identified by the Examiner are not on an outside of the stand housing, as clearly shown in the Examiner's annotated Figure 3 of Cattaneo, which is reproduced below
The side surfaces of Cattaneo are positioned within the stand housing, and do not form the exterior thereof. Such a configuration differs from the stand of the present application, in which the six side surfaces (14.1-14.6) are on the outside of the stand housing, as shown below in Figure 1A of the present application, which is reproduced below.
Thus, Applicant respectfully submits that the Cattaneo reference does not teach or suggest a stand housing having an outside comprising at least six side surfaces, as set forth in amended claim 1. The other cited references, namely, Dedeken, Cernuschi, and Inslee, do not resolve the deficiencies of Cattaneo and have only been cited for allegedly teaching other features.
Cattaneo does teach a stand housing having six side surfaces on an outside thereof. Fig. 3 of Cattaneo is a two-dimensional perspective. Examiner understands that the side surfaces of roll carrier 10 may appear to not be exterior surfaces in the two-dimensional Fig. 3. However, Fig. 2, which is a three-dimensional perspective, shows that the side surfaces of roll carrier 10 do form the exterior thereof.
Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that amended claim 1 is allowable and withdrawal of the pending 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 1 is respectfully requested.
Furthermore, claims 2-10 are dependent on claim 1 and are, therefore, allowable for at least the same reasons recited above and by virtue of the additional claim features set forth therein. Accordingly, withdrawal of the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of claims 2-10 is respectfully requested.”
For the reasons cited above, the rejection of claim 1 is maintained. Likewise, the rejections of the dependencies of claim 1, which Applicant argued were allowable by virtue of claim 1’s allowability, are also maintained.
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 WILLIAM D DICKSTEIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1847. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am to 5:00 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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at 5712701477. 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.
/W.D.D./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights