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 .
This action is in response to the applicant’s communication filed on 10/18/2024
Claims 1-12 are pending
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP § 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 2, and 5-12 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, 2, and 5-12 of copending Application No. 18/858,129 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, each corresponding claim of the reference application expressly recites every limitation of the instant claim and further recites an additional tip-angle limitation. Accordingly, the instant claims are broader than, and not patentably distinct from, the corresponding claims of the reference application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
The following table is exemplary:
Instant Application No. 18/857,981
Co-Pending Application No. 18/858,129
1. A computation device configured to calculate a first position of a tool configured to cut a ridge line at a predetermined machining width, the ridge line being formed by a cylindrical circumferential surface of a workpiece and a circumferential wall surface that defines a through hole penetrating through the workpiece, wherein the workpiece includes an outer circumferential surface and an inner circumferential surface, at least one of the outer circumferential surface or the inner circumferential surface being formed as the cylindrical circumferential surface, and the through hole penetrates, in a shape of a circular cylinder or a columnar body, through the workpiece from one to another of the outer circumferential surface and the inner circumferential surface, the columnar body containing a plurality of the circular cylinders that are parallel to each other and that are disposed respectively in corners of the columnar body, the computation device comprising:
an acquisition unit configured to acquire machining target data and a third radius of the tool, the machining target data including a second position of the workpiece, a third position of the through hole, a first radius of the cylindrical circumferential surface of the workpiece, a second radius of the circular cylinder, a first direction in which a first central axial line of the workpiece extends, and an eccentric distance of a second central axial line of the circular cylinder from the first central axial line, the second central axial line extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction; and
a first computation unit configured to calculate the first position of the tool that cuts the ridge line including a machining target point that is on the ridge line, based on a second tangent line to a first ellipse at the machining target point, a third tangent line to a second ellipse at the machining target point, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, wherein the first ellipse is formed by the cylindrical circumferential surface and a plane, the plane is perpendicular to a first tangent line to the ridge line at the machining target point and includes the machining target point, the plane being determined based on a fourth position of the machining target point and the machining target data, and the second ellipse is formed by the circular cylinder and the plane.
1. A computation device configured to calculate a first position of a tool configured to cut a ridge line at a predetermined machining width, the ridge line being formed by a cylindrical circumferential surface of a workpiece and a circumferential wall surface that defines a through hole penetrating through the workpiece, wherein the workpiece includes an outer circumferential surface and an inner circumferential surface, at least one of the outer circumferential surface or the inner circumferential surface being formed as the cylindrical circumferential surface, and the through hole penetrates, in a shape of a circular cylinder or a columnar body, through the workpiece from one to another of the outer circumferential surface and the inner circumferential surface, the columnar body containing a plurality of the circular cylinders that are parallel to each other and that are disposed respectively in corners of the columnar body, the computation device comprising:
an acquisition unit configured to acquire machining target data, a third radius of the tool, and a first angle of a tip angle formed by a cutting surface of the tool, the machining target data including a second position of the workpiece, a third position of the through hole, a first radius of the cylindrical circumferential surface of the workpiece, a second radius of the circular cylinder, a first direction in which a first central axial line of the workpiece extends, and an eccentric distance of a second central axial line of the circular cylinder from the first central axial line, the second central axial line extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction; and
a first computation unit configured to calculate the first position of the tool that cuts the ridge line including a machining target point that is on the ridge line, based on a second tangent line to a first ellipse at the machining target point, a third tangent line to a second ellipse at the machining target point, the predetermined machining width, the third radius of the tool, and the first angle of the tool, wherein the first ellipse is formed by the cylindrical circumferential surface and a plane, the plane is perpendicular to a first tangent line to the ridge line at the machining target point and includes the machining target point, the plane being determined based on a fourth position of the machining target point and the machining target data, and the second ellipse is formed by the circular cylinder and the plane.
2. The computation device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a determination unit configured to determine, when a tolerance amount in relation to a machining path corresponding to the ridge line is set by a user, a plurality of the machining target points on the ridge line, based on the tolerance amount, wherein the tool cuts the ridge line while moving along the machining path,
wherein the first computation unit calculates the first position of the tool corresponding to each of the plurality of machining target points
2. The computation device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a determination unit configured to determine, when a tolerance amount in relation to a machining path corresponding to the ridge line is set by a user, a plurality of the machining target points on the ridge line, based on the tolerance amount, wherein the tool cuts the ridge line while moving along the machining path,
wherein the first computation unit calculates the first position of the tool corresponding to each of the plurality of machining target points
5. The computation device according to claim 1, wherein:
the through hole penetrates, in a shape of the circular cylinder, through the workpiece; and
in a case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the through hole is of a circular shape corresponding to the circular cylinder.
5. The computation device according to claim 1, wherein:
the through hole penetrates, in a shape of the circular cylinder, through the workpiece; and
in a case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the through hole is of a circular shape corresponding to the circular cylinder
6. The computation device according to claim 1, wherein:
the through hole penetrates, in a shape of the columnar body, through the workpiece, the columnar body containing two of the circular cylinders parallel to each other and which are disposed respectively in both corners of the columnar body;
in a case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the through hole is of an elongated hole shape corresponding to the columnar body;
in the case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the ridge line of the through hole includes two circular arc-shaped segments corresponding respectively to the two circular cylinders, and two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with the first direction;
the first computation unit calculates, based on the second tangent line, the third tangent line, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the two circular arc-shaped segments of the ridge line; and
the first computation unit calculates, based on the first position of the tool within each of the two circular arc-shaped segments and the machining target data, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the two straight line-shaped segments of the ridge line
6. The computation device according to claim 1, wherein:
the through hole penetrates, in a shape of the columnar body, through the workpiece, the columnar body containing two of the circular cylinders parallel to each other and which are disposed respectively in both corners of the columnar body;
in a case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the through hole is of an elongated hole shape corresponding to the columnar body;
in the case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the ridge line of the through hole includes two circular arc-shaped segments corresponding respectively to the two circular cylinders, and two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with the first direction;
the first computation unit calculates, based on the second tangent line, the third tangent line, the predetermined machining width, the third radius of the tool, and the first angle of the tool, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the two circular arc-shaped segments of the ridge line; and
the first computation unit calculates, based on the first position of the tool within each of the two circular arc-shaped segments, and the machining target data, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the two straight line-shaped segments of the ridge line.
7. The computation device according to claim 1, wherein:
the through hole penetrates, in a shape of the columnar body, through the workpiece, the columnar body containing four of the circular cylinders parallel to each other and which are disposed respectively in four corners of the columnar body;
in a case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the through hole is of a rounded rectangular shape corresponding to the columnar body;
in the case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the ridge line of the through hole includes four circular arc-shaped segments corresponding respectively to the four circular cylinders, two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with the first direction, and other two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with a direction perpendicular to the first direction and to the second direction;
the first computation unit calculates, based on the second tangent line, the third tangent line, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the four circular arc-shaped segments of the ridge line; and
the first computation unit calculates, based on the first position of the tool within each of the four circular arc-shaped segments and the machining target data, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with the first direction and the other two straight line-shaped segments, of the ridge line.
7. The computation device according to claim 1, wherein:
the through hole penetrates, in a shape of the columnar body, through the workpiece, the columnar body containing four of the circular cylinders parallel to each other and which are disposed respectively in four corners of the columnar body;
in a case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the through hole is of a rounded rectangular shape corresponding to the columnar body;
in the case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the ridge line of the through hole includes four circular arc-shaped segments corresponding respectively to the four circular cylinders, two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with the first direction, and other two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with a direction perpendicular to the first direction and to the second direction;
the first computation unit calculates, based on the second tangent line, the third tangent line, the predetermined machining width, the third radius of the tool, and the first angle of the tool, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the four circular arc-shaped segments of the ridge line; and
the first computation unit calculates, based on the first position of the tool within each of the four circular arc-shaped segments and the machining target data, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with the first direction and the other two straight line-shaped segments, of the ridge line.
8. The computation device according to claim 1, wherein the acquisition unit acquires the predetermined machining width based on a user input.
8. The computation device according to claim 1, wherein the acquisition unit acquires the predetermined machining width based on a user input.
9. The computation device according to claim 1, wherein:
the acquisition unit acquires the machining target data, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, based on a G-code, which indicates a command for calling a macro program from a storage device, the G-code having as an argument at least one of the predetermined machining width, the machining target data, or a number associated with the tool;
the first computation unit reads out the macro program from the storage device based on the G-code; and
the first computation unit calculates the first position of the tool by executing the macro program.
9. The computation device according to claim 1, wherein:
the acquisition unit acquires the machining target data, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, based on a G-code, which indicates a command for calling a macro program from a storage device, the G-code having as an argument at least one of the predetermined machining width, the machining target data, or a number associated with the tool;
the first computation unit reads out the macro program from the storage device based on the G-code; and
the first computation unit calculates the first position of the tool by executing the macro program.
10. A machine tool comprising:
the computation device according to claim 1;
the tool; and
a machining control unit configured to cause the tool to move to the first position and cause the tool to cut the ridge line.
10. A machine tool comprising:
the computation device according to claim 1;
the tool; and
a machining control unit configured to cause the tool to move to the first position and cause the tool to cut the ridge line.
11. A control device for a machine tool, comprising:
the computation device according to claim 1; and
a machining control unit configured to cause the tool to move to the first position and cause the tool to cut the ridge line.
11. A control device for a machine tool, comprising:
the computation device according to claim 1; and
a machining control unit configured to cause the tool to move to the first position and cause the tool to cut the ridge line.
12. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that stores a computation program configured to cause a processing circuit included in a computation device, to perform an acquisition step and a computation step,
wherein: the computation device is configured to calculate a first position of a tool configured to cut a ridge line at a predetermined machining width, the ridge line being formed by a cylindrical circumferential surface of a workpiece and a circumferential wall surface that defines a through hole penetrating through the workpiece; the workpiece includes an outer circumferential surface and an inner circumferential surface, at least one of the outer circumferential surface or the inner circumferential surface being formed as the cylindrical circumferential surface; and the through hole penetrates, in a shape of a circular cylinder or a columnar body, through the workpiece from one to another of the outer circumferential surface and the inner circumferential surface, the columnar body containing a plurality of the circular cylinders that are parallel to each other and that are disposed respectively in corners of the columnar body, and
wherein
the acquisition step comprises acquiring machining target data and a third radius of the tool, the machining target data including a second position of the workpiece, a third position of the through hole, a first radius of the cylindrical circumferential surface of the workpiece, a second radius of the circular cylinder, a first direction in which a first central axial line of the workpiece extends, and an eccentric distance of a second central axial line of the circular cylinder from the first central axial line, the second central axial line extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and
the computation step comprises calculating the first position of the tool that cuts the ridge line including a machining target point that is on the ridge line, based on a second tangent line to a first ellipse at the machining target point, a third tangent line to a second ellipse at the machining target point, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, wherein the first ellipse is formed by the cylindrical circumferential surface and a plane, the plane is perpendicular to a first tangent line to the ridge line at the machining target point and includes the machining target point, the plane being determined based on a fourth position of the machining target point and the machining target data, and the second ellipse is formed by the circular cylinder and the plane.
12. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that stores a computation program configured to cause a processing circuit included in a computation device, to perform an acquisition step and a computation step,
wherein: the computation device is configured to calculate a first position of a tool configured to cut a ridge line at a predetermined machining width, the ridge line being formed by a cylindrical circumferential surface of a workpiece and a circumferential wall surface that defines a through hole penetrating through the workpiece; the workpiece includes an outer circumferential surface and an inner circumferential surface, at least one of the outer circumferential surface or the inner circumferential surface being formed as the cylindrical circumferential surface; and the through hole penetrates, in a shape of a circular cylinder or a columnar body, through the workpiece from one to another of the outer circumferential surface and the inner circumferential surface, the columnar body containing a plurality of the circular cylinders that are parallel to each other and that are disposed respectively in corners of the columnar body, and
wherein
the acquisition step comprises acquiring machining target data, a third radius of the tool, and an angle of a tip angle formed by a cutting surface of the tool, the machining target data including a second position of the workpiece, a third position of the through hole, a first radius of the cylindrical circumferential surface of the workpiece, a second radius of the circular cylinder, a first direction in which a first central axial line of the workpiece extends, and an eccentric distance of a second central axial line of the circular cylinder from the first central axial line, the second central axial line extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and
the computation step comprises calculating the first position of the tool that cuts the ridge line including a machining target point that is on the ridge line, based on a second tangent line to a first ellipse at the machining target point, a third tangent line to a second ellipse at the machining target point, the predetermined machining width, the third radius of the tool, and the angle of the tool, wherein the first ellipse is formed by the cylindrical circumferential surface and a plane, the plane is perpendicular to a first tangent line to the ridge line at the machining target point and includes the machining target point, the plane being determined based on a fourth position of the machining target point and the machining target data, and the second ellipse is formed by the circular cylinder and the plane.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the other two straight line-shaped segments, of the ridge line.” The comma following “segments” is unnecessary and should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a processing circuit included in a computation device, to perform an acquisition step and a computation step.” The comma following “computation device” is unnecessary and should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “acquisition unit”, “computation unit”, “determination unit”, “machining control unit” in claims 1-12.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-12 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 1 recites the limitation "the circular cylinders" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Amendment of claim 1 to provide proper antecedent basis for “the circular cylinders” would also correct the corresponding antecedent-basis deficiency in dependent claims.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the machining target points" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 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 3 recites “a first angle of the angle” in line 6. It is unclear what is meant by “a first angle of the angle” because the claim does not define the first angle or identify the lines that form the first angle. Accordingly, the scope of claim 3 is unclear.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the first radius R1 of the workpiece" in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitations "the ridge line of the through hole" in line 9, and “the two circular cylinders” in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the ridge line of the through hole" in line 9, and "the four circular cylinders" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the circular cylinders" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding independent claim 1, at step 1, the claim recites a computation device comprising an acquisition unit and a first computation unit and therefore is a machine, which is a statutory category of invention.
At step 2A, prong one, the claim recites “calculate the first position of the tool that cuts the ridge line including a machining target point that is on the ridge line, based on a second tangent line to a first ellipse at the machining target point, a third tangent line to a second ellipse at the machining target point, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool,”. Claim 1 further defines the first ellipse, the second ellipse, and the plane using positional, radial, directional, and eccentric-distance data.
These limitations set forth mathematical relationships and calculations. In particular, the limitations define plane-cylinder intersection curves, tangent lines to the curves at a selected point, and the calculation of a coordinate position based on the tangent lines, geometric dimensions, machining width, and tool radius. Accordingly, claim 1 recites mathematical concepts, namely mathematical relationships and mathematical calculations for determining a tool position from geometric machining-target data. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I).
At step 2A, prong two, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The additional limitation of an “acquisition unit configured to acquire machining target data and a third radius of the tool” merely gathers the data upon which the mathematical calculations are performed. The recited computation device and first computation unit merely provide computer components for performing mathematical calculations.
The recitations of a tool, a cylindrical workpiece, a hole, and a ridge line identify the technological environment and the physical subject represented by the data. However, claim 1 does not require the computation device to transmit the calculated position to a machine-tool controller, generate a machine-control command, move the tool, control the tool, or cut the workpiece. The recitation that the tool is “configured to cut” the ridge line describes the intended use of the calculated position but does not require that the calculation be applied to the tool or machining process. Accordingly, the claim merely links mathematical calculations to the field of machine-tool deburring and does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d), 2106.05(g), and 2106.05(h).
At step 2B, the additional elements, individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than mathematical concepts. The specification describes the computation device as a processing circuit, such as a CPU or GPU, operating with RAM, ROM or flash memory, and ordinary input/output devices such as an operation panel, keyboard, mouse, display, or touch panel. See paragraphs [0019] – [0023]. The acquisition unit obtains the data used in the calculations, and the first computation unit performs the recited mathematical calculations using that data.
The recited tool, workpiece, through hole, cylindrical surfaces, and ridge line identify the physical subject and intended technological environment of the calculated information, but claim 1 does not require those elements to be controlled, transformed, or otherwise acted upon by the computation device. The ordered combination therefore amounts to using generic computing components to acquire data and perform the recited mathematical calculations, without an additional element or combination that provides an inventive concept apart from the mathematical concepts themselves. Accordingly, claim 1 does not recite significantly more than the judicial exception and is not patent eligible. See MPEP 2106.05(d), 2106.05(f), 2106.05(g), and 2106.05(h).
Regarding independent claim 12, the claim recites substantively the same abstract idea identified in claim 1 above, including acquiring geometric machining-target data and a tool radius and calculating a tool position based on tangent lines to first and second ellipses, a machining width, and the tool radius. Claim 12 recites substantively similar additional elements in the form of a processing circuit and a storage medium containing instructions for performing the abstract mathematical calculations. Therefore, claim 12 does not integrate the mathematical concepts into a practical application and does not add significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons indicated in the analysis of claim 1 above.
Regarding dependent claim 2, the additional limitations of “a determination unit configured to determine, when a tolerance amount in relation to a machining path corresponding to the ridge line is set by a user, a plurality of the machining target points on the ridge line, based on the tolerance amount” and “the first computation unit calculates the first position of the tool corresponding to each of the plurality of machining target points” merely further specify the mathematical technique used to select the points for which the tool positions are calculated. The limitation that “the tool cuts the ridge line while moving along the machining path” merely identifies the intended use of the calculated points because the claimed computation device does not include or control the tool. Thus, the limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or add significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding dependent claim 3, the additional limitations of “calculates, based on the machining target data, a bisector that bisects an angle formed by the second tangent line and the third tangent line, with the machining target point serving as a starting point”; “calculates, based on a first angle of the angle and the predetermined machining width, a second distance between the machining target point and a point of intersection where the bisector perpendicularly intersects with a line segment that connects a first end point on the second tangent line and a second end point on the third tangent line, a first distance between the first end point and the second end point being equal to the predetermined machining width”; and “calculates the first position of the tool based on the bisector, the second distance, the third radius of the tool, and the predetermined machining width” merely further specify the mathematical technique used to calculate the tool position. These limitations are part of the mathematical concepts identified above and do not require using the calculated position to move or control the tool or to cut the workpiece. Thus, the limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or add significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding dependent claim 4, the additional limitation of “a second computation unit configured to calculate a first basis vector and a second basis vector, based on the machining target data, wherein the first basis vector is a vector on the plane and perpendicular to the second central axial line, and has the machining target point as a starting point, and the second basis vector is a vector on the plane and perpendicular to the first basis vector, and has the machining target point as a starting point” merely recites calculating mathematical vectors.
The additional limitations of “calculates, based on a following Equation (1) in which the first radius R1 of the workpiece, the second radius R2 of the circular cylinder, and the eccentric distance f are used, a second angle α”; “calculates, based on a following Equation (2) in which the second angle α is used, a direction vector u”; “calculates, based on a following Equation (3) in which the second angle α and the predetermined machining width √2·Q are used, a second distance L”; “calculates, based on a following Equation (4) in which the direction vector u, the second distance L, the third radius D of the tool, and the predetermined machining width √2·Q are used, a coordinate value (Sc, Tc) representing the first position of the tool on the plane”; and “calculates, based on the coordinate value, the first basis vector, and the second basis vector, the first position of the tool in a coordinate space defined by the X-axis, the Y-axis, and the Z-axis” merely further specify mathematical formulas, vectors, distances, and coordinate transformations used to calculate the tool position. These limitations are part of the mathematical concepts identified above and do not require using the calculated position to control the tool or cut the workpiece. Thus, the limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or add significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding dependent claim 5, the additional limitations that “the through hole penetrates, in a shape of the circular cylinder, through the workpiece” and “in a case that the through hole is viewed from directly above the through hole, the through hole is of a circular shape corresponding to the circular cylinder” merely further define the geometric information upon which the mathematical calculation is performed. Limiting the calculation to a circular through-hole geometry merely limits the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use and does not require using the calculated position to control the tool or cut the workpiece. Thus, the limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or add significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding dependent claim 6, the additional limitations that “the through hole penetrates, in a shape of the columnar body, through the workpiece, the columnar body containing two of the circular cylinders parallel to each other and which are disposed respectively in both corners of the columnar body”; “the through hole is of an elongated hole shape corresponding to the columnar body”; and “the ridge line of the through hole includes two circular arc-shaped segments corresponding respectively to the two circular cylinders, and two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with the first direction” merely further define the geometric information upon which the mathematical calculation is performed.
The additional limitations that “the first computation unit calculates, based on the second tangent line, the third tangent line, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the two circular arc-shaped segments of the ridge line” and “the first computation unit calculates, based on the first position of the tool within each of the two circular arc-shaped segments and the machining target data, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the two straight line-shaped segments of the ridge line” merely further specify mathematical calculations of tool-position information for the different geometric segments. The claim does not require using the calculated positions to control the tool or cut the ridge line. Thus, the limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or add significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding dependent claim 7, the additional limitations that “the through hole penetrates, in a shape of the columnar body, through the workpiece, the columnar body containing four of the circular cylinders parallel to each other and which are disposed respectively in four corners of the columnar body”; “the through hole is of a rounded rectangular shape corresponding to the columnar body”; and “the ridge line of the through hole includes four circular arc-shaped segments corresponding respectively to the four circular cylinders, two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with the first direction, and other two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with a direction perpendicular to the first direction and to the second direction” merely further define the geometric information upon which the mathematical calculation is performed.
The additional limitations that “the first computation unit calculates, based on the second tangent line, the third tangent line, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the four circular arc-shaped segments of the ridge line” and “the first computation unit calculates, based on the first position of the tool within each of the four circular arc-shaped segments and the machining target data, the first position of the tool corresponding to the machining target point within each of the two straight line-shaped segments that are in parallel with the first direction and the other two straight line-shaped segments, of the ridge line” merely further specify mathematical calculations of tool-position information for the different geometric segments. The claim does not require using the calculated positions to control the tool or cut the ridge line. Thus, the limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or add significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding dependent claim 8, the additional limitation that “the acquisition unit acquires the predetermined machining width based on a user input” merely specifies the source of an item of data used in performing the mathematical calculation. Acquiring a user-selected value is insignificant extra-solution activity performed before the abstract calculation and does not require using the calculated position to control a machine tool. Thus, the limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or add significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding dependent claim 9, the additional limitations that “the acquisition unit acquires the machining target data, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, based on a G-code, which indicates a command for calling a macro program from a storage device, the G-code having as an argument at least one of the predetermined machining width, the machining target data, or a number associated with the tool”; “the first computation unit reads out the macro program from the storage device based on the G-code”; and “the first computation unit calculates the first position of the tool by executing the macro program” merely specify the computer-programming mechanism used to obtain data and perform the mathematical calculation. Calling a program, reading the program from storage, and executing the program to calculate the tool position merely implement the abstract idea using computer components performing their ordinary functions. The claim does not require the G-code or macro program to generate a machine-control command, move the tool, or cause the tool to cut the ridge line. Thus, the limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or add significantly more than the abstract idea.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1-12 are allowable over prior art. However, claims 1-12 remain rejected under double patenting, 35 USC 101, and 35 USC 112(b) rejections as set forth above. Claims 7 and 12 also remain objected to for the informalities set forth above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
While Sato et al. WO 2016/133162 A1 discloses calculating a tool position for machining a ridge line using tangent vectors to intersection lines formed between a normal plane and respective surfaces of a cylindrical workpiece and a through hole, together with a predetermined machining width and a tool radius, Miyazaki JP 2005-271148 A discloses calculating ball-end-mill center positions based on stored workpiece-shape, positional-relationship, machining-shape, and tool-shape data, and Kaneko et al. USPGPUB 2022/0382253 A1 discloses identifying a cutting point of a tool based on a machining program, a machining-target shape, and tool information and modifying a movement command such that the cutting point does not change, none of these references, taken either alone or in combination with the prior art of record, disclose the following limitations, and the prior art of record does not provide an articulated reason to modify the disclosed systems to arrive at the claimed integrated calculation:
Claim 1: “based on a second tangent line to a first ellipse at the machining target point, a third tangent line to a second ellipse at the machining target point, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, wherein the first ellipse is formed by the cylindrical circumferential surface and a plane, the plane is perpendicular to a first tangent line to the ridge line at the machining target point and includes the machining target point, the plane being determined based on a fourth position of the machining target point and the machining target data, and the second ellipse is formed by the circular cylinder and the plane”; and
Claim 12: “based on a second tangent line to a first ellipse at the machining target point, a third tangent line to a second ellipse at the machining target point, the predetermined machining width, and the third radius of the tool, wherein the first ellipse is formed by the cylindrical circumferential surface and a plane, the plane is perpendicular to a first tangent line to the ridge line at the machining target point and includes the machining target point, the plane being determined based on a fourth position of the machining target point and the machining target data, and the second ellipse is formed by the circular cylinder and the plane.”
In combination with the remaining elements and features of the claimed invention.
It is for these reasons that the applicant’s invention defines over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER XU whose telephone number is (571)272-0792. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Mohammad Ali can be reached at (571) 272-4105. 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.
/PETER XU/ Examiner, Art Unit 2119
/MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights