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 .
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.
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 limitations 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 limitations are: “clamping jaw grasping mechanism”, “material preparation rack”, “teaching device”, “first movable bracket power mechanism”, “second movable bracket power mechanism”, “third movable bracket power mechanism”, “first rotating mechanism”, “power mechanism”, “second clamping jaw grasping mechanism”, “third clamping jaw grasping mechanism”, “automatic process overturning mechanism”, “second rotating mechanism” and “fourth clamping jaw mechanism” in claims 1-5.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they 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 these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid 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 limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid 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 1-5 are 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 limitation “clamping jaw grasping mechanism” in claim 1 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. There is no description of “clamping jaw grasping mechanism” in the specification beyond simply restating the presence of said mechanism. There is no discussion of what the mechanism is comprised of at all. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Similarly, limitations: “material preparation rack”, “teaching device”, “first movable bracket power mechanism”, “second movable bracket power mechanism”, “third movable bracket power mechanism”, “first rotating mechanism”, “power mechanism”, “second clamping jaw grasping mechanism”, “third clamping jaw grasping mechanism”, “automatic process overturning mechanism”, “second rotating mechanism” and “fourth clamping jaw mechanism” in claims 1-5 invoke 112f and are not provided with sufficient structure disclosed in the specification for performing the functions described by the limitations, e.g. “preparing material”, “teaching”, “powering a first movable bracket”, etc.
Regarding claims 2, 4 and 5, all of the limitations that are not reference characters and are included in parentheses, such as “(material preparation rack)” at Line 4 of claim 2, render the claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations included in parentheses are part of the claimed invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitations, "the first movable bracket power mechanism", “the second movable bracket power mechanism”, “the third movable bracket power mechanism”, “the first, second and third clamping jaw grasping mechanism” and “the first telescopic mechanism”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation, “the second fixing bracket”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “material tray I”. It is unclear what is meant by this limitation. Similarly, claim 5 recites the limitations, “material tray I”, “material tray II” and “material tray III”. It is unclear what is meant by these limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5, as best understood in view of the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections above, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mao et al. (CN 213105786, hereinafter ‘Mao’).
Regarding claim 1, Mao discloses a computer numerical control lathe loading and unloading machine capable of automatic material overturning comprising a truss manipulator 2 provided with a clamping jaw grasping mechanism 1. A material preparation rack 41 is installed on the outer end of the truss manipulator and a teaching device (e.g. control panel visible in Fig. 4) is installed on the outer end of the material preparation rack.
Regarding claim 2, Mao discloses the machine according to claim 1, wherein the truss manipulator comprises a first fixing bracket 3, a first guide rail 22 and a second fixing bracket 3 connected to the first fixing bracket (by way of the brace between the two fixing brackets visible in Figs. 1 & 2). A first movable bracket (sliding assembly) is connected to the first guide rail and a second guide rail 21 is connected to the first movable bracket. A second movable bracket is connected to the end of the second guide rail (see Fig. 3) and a third guide rail (not visible, but the rail slides through the guide visible in the second movable bracket as illustrated in Fig. 3) is connected to the second movable bracket. A third movable bracket (assembly illustrated in Fig. 3) is connected to the third guide rail. A first rotating mechanism 121 is provided on the third movable bracket, said rotating mechanism provided with the jaw grasping mechanism 11 disposed on a telescopic mechanism (e.g. beam 21 which is lifted and lowered).
Regarding claim 3, Mao discloses the machine according to claim 1, wherein the material preparation rack is provided with a fixing bracket (e.g. any suitable structure, such as the brace that fixes/supports the door(s) visible in Fig. 4) and is equipped with an automatic process surface overturning mechanism (e.g. the mechanism moving the material tray in the direction perpendicular to the truss manipulator visible in Fig. 4) and a material tray that holds the workpieces.
Regarding claim 5, line 3 of the claim recites, “the material preparation rack may further comprise…”, setting forth all following limitations as optional. Therefore no additional limitations are required in the claim.
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 4, as best understood in view of the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections above, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al. (CN 213105786) in view of Liu et al. (CN 110978037, hereinafter “Liu”).
Regarding claim 4, Mao does not disclose the material preparation rack of the machine of claim 1 having the additionally claimed components.
Liu discloses a similar lathe loading and unloading machine, wherein the material preparation rack 1 is provided with a second fixing bracket (first and second sets of rails 12) provided with a second telescopic mechanism 121 and second material tray 13. The second telescopic mechanism is provided with a rotating mechanism 14 having a clamping jaw grasping mechanism 141.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the machine of Mao with the material preparation rack according to Liu, in order to allow a more efficient material changing mechanism (Abstract of Liu).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wei (CN 110711864) discloses a similar CNC lathe loading/unloading machine with a truss manipulator and material preparation rack as claimed. Xu (CN 110340381), Jiang (CN 109079162) and Oda (US 201000092273) disclose similar CNC lathe loading/unloading machines.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alan Snyder whose telephone number is (571)272-4603. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 7:00a - 5:00p.
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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
/Alan Snyder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722
