19DETAILED 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 .
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JPS6078233 U in view of Tatsuda (USpgpub 20020094900).
Regarding claim 1, JPS 6078233 discloses a double rotation indexing device having two sets of rotation indexing units, where a number of sets of the rotation indexing units provided in the double rotation indexing device is only two (seen in fig.2 and fig.3; there is a two indexing device set up),
each of the rotation indexing units comprising:
a main shaft (31) rotatably supported in a frame (seen in figures) and having one end side to which a rotation target member (rotary table 3) is attached; and
a drive transmission mechanism (various shafts/gears) configured to transmit rotation of an output shaft of a drive motor to the main shaft,
the drive transmission mechanism including:
a drive shaft (44) configured to being be rotationally driven by the drive motor (42);
a disk-shaped driven member (gear 43) attached to the main shaft; and
a drive member (worm 45) provided on the drive shaft and having a spiral groove (it’s a worm gear and thus would have said groove) formed to engage directly or indirectly with the driven member,
the drive shafts of both rotation indexing units being connected by a connecting member (46), and
the drive motor being connected to an end portion (seen in fig.3), on an opposite side to the connecting member side, of the drive shaft of one rotation indexing unit,
wherein the other end side of the drive shaft in one rotation indexing unit is connected to the other end side of the drive shaft in an other rotation indexing unit (seen in fig.3).
JPS ‘233 fails to explicitly disclose the type of bearings supporting the shafts and in particular the drive shaft being supported on one end side by the frame via a bearing holder having a built-in thrust bearing and being supported on an other end side by the frame via a radial bearing.
Tatsuda teaches and/or suggests, within the same field of double indexing units, the concept of utilizing a drive shaft being supported on one end side by the frame via a bearing holder (fig.1, 30) having a built-in thrust bearing (fig.1, 28) and being supported on an other end side by the frame via a radial bearing (fig.1, 28; as clearly seen in fig.1, the bearings closest to coupling 20 are both radial bearings). Tatsuda further teaches the bearings to both shafts of the double indexing unit as seen in fig.1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drive shaft assemblies disclosed in JPS ‘233 to utilize the bearing arrangement as taught/suggested in Tatsuda in order to provide the predictable results of adequately supporting the loads on the shafts and distributing said load appropriately. The bearings also would provide support and make the assembly as a whole robust and sturdy, in addition, the use of said bearings is common knowledge in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments regarding JPS ‘233 are confusing. Applicant appears to be arguing that there are no disclosure for the ends as claimed because apparently the ends can only be defined which bearing type is being used. This is unreasonable because the ends are simply ends of the respective drive shaft and the bearings being used are simply being taught. It is very clear that JPS’233 has the same general set up of the rotary table that Applicant has claimed. The only thing absent from the disclosure is the details regarding bearings for the ends of the shafts. However, it is well known to PHOSITA that bearings are required and/or commonly used to support the ends of rotating shafts. For this reason, the bearings/bearing arrangements are being taught by Tatsuda.
Moreover, Applicant argues that JPS ‘233 doesn’t or couldn’t have the same set up of the ends as claimed. However, it is understood by a PHOSITA that bearing arrangements are readily changeable even by simple substitution. In this instance, JPS ‘233 has the similar arrangement as the claimed invention in that there’s one drive motor 42 at one end, which drives a first drive shaft 44 which is linked to the next drive shaft of the 2nd indexing unit via the linkage 46 at the “other” or intermediate end of the assembly as a whole. In other words, there are two outer ends and two intermediate ends. It is not readily understood why it would present any difficulty to a person of ordinary skill in the art to teach in the bearing arrangement such as the one taught/suggested in Tatsuda.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Tatsuda and any embodiment not being utilized do not have relevance to the current invention. As far as the rejection is concerned, Tatsuda very clearly teaches and/or suggests the use of thrust bearings on the outer shaft ends and radial bearings on the inner ends which are closest to the linkage between the two shafts. Applicant’s arguments regarding the nomenclature of these ends is simply not compelling as there is no reason why the ends couldn’t be called by any name since they structurally perform the same functions and would have the same end structure after the teaching.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 THOMAS C DIAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5461. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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.
/THOMAS C DIAZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights