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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements filed on 12/27/2024 and 5/23/2025 are being considered by the Examiner.
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:
a securing component configured to secure a skate blade within a skate sharpening system in claim 1.
a measurement system configured to obtain measurement data associated with at least one component in claim 69.
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 Objections
Claims 66 and 67 objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 66 and 67, please add a “wherein” or additional phrase following the preamble.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5 and 62-68 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 5, claim 5 recites “the at least one measurement device is configured to measure a location of an object in the securing component”. Claim 1 , from which claim 5 depends, recites “at least one measurement device configured to perform at least one measurement of at least one of component of the skate sharpening system”. Within the context of claim 5, is it unclear if claim 5 is intending to limit the “at least one component” of claim 1, or if the measurement device is configured to measure an additional component.
Regarding claim 62, “a skate sharpening system” is recited twice within the body of the claim.
Regarding claim 68, claim 68 recites “wherein the alignment instructions provide manual adjustments to the skate sharpening system for a user to manually align the center location”. Claim 63, which is in the scope of dependency of claim 68, recites “automatically aligning the center location….”. Based on the recitation of claim 63, a person having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably conclude that the alignment takes place in an automated manner. However, claim 68 then recites that the alignment is done manually by a user. It is unclear what Applicant intended to impart based on the combination of recitations.
Any claim listed as rejected above but not specifically addressed above has inherited the rejection of a claim specifically addressed above due to dependency therefrom.
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 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.
Claims 62, 69, 73, 79-83, 85, and 92-93 are rejected under 35 USC 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. abstract idea) without anything significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 62 is directed to a method and claims 69, 73, 79-83, 85, and 92-93 are directed to a method. Therefore, the claims are directed to patent eligible categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Independent claims 62 and 69 recite generating an output or instruction, constituting an abstract idea based on “Mental Processes” related to concepts performed in the human mind including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. Independent claim 62 recites limitations including “determining, a center location of a skate blade in a skate sharpening system; determining, a center location of a grinding wheel in a skate sharpening system; and generating, instructions to align the center location of the skate blade with the center location of the grinding wheel.” Independent claim 69 recites limitations including “obtain measurement data associated with at least one component; and determine at least one measurement of the at least one component of the skate sharpening system, and generate an output based at least in part on the at least one measurement.” These limitations, as drafted, but for the recitation of “by the control system,” is a process that covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, but for the “by the control system” language, nothing in the claim elements preclude the steps from practically being performed in the human mind. For example, with the exception of the “by the control system” language, the claim steps in the context of the claim encompass a user mentally or manually performing the steps of the claim.
Dependent claims 73, 79-82, and 83 further narrow the abstract idea identified in the independent claims and do not introduce further additional elements for consideration.
Dependent claims 85 and 92-93 will be evaluated under Step 2A, Prong 2 below.
Step 2A, Prong 2: Independent claims 62 and 69 do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Independent claim 62 recites several abstract limitations performed “by the control system” and “using the at least one measurement device.” Independent claim 69 recites the additional element of “a measurement system configured to obtain measurement data associated with at least one component of the skate sharpening system.” Independent claim 69 further recites the additional element of “a control system with computer-executable instructions configured to, when executed,” which is configured to perform the claim steps of “determine” and “generate.” These additional elements are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea using a computer in its ordinary capacity, or merely uses the computer as a tool to perform the identified abstract idea. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., mental processes) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Independent claim 69 further recites the additional element of “a frame configured to couple to a securing component of a skate sharpening system.” This limitation does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because it is nothing more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. The claim employs generic computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment. This type of generally linking is not sufficient to prove integration into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Therefore, the additional elements of the independent claims, when considered both individually and in combination, are not sufficient to prove integration into a practical application.
Dependent claims 73, 79-82, and 83 further narrow the abstract idea identified in the independent claims and do not introduce further additional elements for consideration, which does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Dependent claim 85 introduces the additional element “wherein the measurement system further comprises a light emitting source and a sensor.” This limitation does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because it is nothing more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. The claim employs generic computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment. This type of generally linking is not sufficient to prove integration into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Dependent claim 92 introduces the additional element “further comprising an external housing, the frame positioned at least partially within the external housing.” This limitation does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because it is nothing more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. The claim employs generic computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment. This type of generally linking is not sufficient to prove integration into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Dependent claim 93 introduces the additional element “wherein the external housing comprises a plurality of resilient members extending into the frame, wherein the plurality of resilient members are configured to allow the frame to move relatively to the external housing.” This limitation does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because it is nothing more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. The claim employs generic computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment. This type of generally linking is not sufficient to prove integration into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Therefore, the dependent claims, when considered both individually and in the context of the independent claims above, are not sufficient to prove integration into a practical application.
Step 2B: Independent claims 62 and 69 do not comprise anything significantly more. Independent claim 62 recites several abstract limitations performed “by the control system” and “using the at least one measurement device.” Independent claim 69 recites the additional element of “a measurement system configured to obtain measurement data associated with at least one component of the skate sharpening system.” Independent claim 69 further recites the additional element of “a control system with computer-executable instructions configured to, when executed,” which is configured to perform the claim steps of “determine” and “generate.” These additional elements are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea using a computer in its ordinary capacity, or merely uses the computer as a tool to perform the identified abstract idea. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., mental processes) is not anything significantly more. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Independent claim 69 further recites the additional element of “a frame configured to couple to a securing component of a skate sharpening system.” This limitation is not anything significantly more because it is nothing more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. The claim employs generic computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment. This type of generally linking is not anything significantly more. See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Therefore, the additional elements of the independent claims, when considered both individually and in combination, are not anything significantly more.
Dependent claims 73, 79-82, and 83 further narrow the abstract idea identified in the independent claims and do not introduce further additional elements for consideration, which is not anything significantly more.
Dependent claim 85 introduces the additional element “wherein the measurement system further comprises a light emitting source and a sensor.” This limitation is not anything significantly more because it is nothing more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. The claim employs generic computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment. This type of generally linking is not anything significantly more. See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Dependent claim 92 introduces the additional element “further comprising an external housing, the frame positioned at least partially within the external housing.” This limitation is not anything significantly more because it is nothing more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. The claim employs generic computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment. This type of generally linking is not anything significantly more. See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Dependent claim 93 introduces the additional element “wherein the external housing comprises a plurality of resilient members extending into the frame, wherein the plurality of resilient members are configured to allow the frame to move relatively to the external housing.” This limitation is not anything significantly more because it is nothing more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. The claim employs generic computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment. This type of generally linking is not anything significantly more. See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Therefore, the dependent claims, when considered both individually and in the context of the independent claims above, are not anything significantly more than the judicial exception.
Accordingly, claims 62, 69, 73, 79-83, 85, and 92-93 are rejected under 35 USC 101.
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, 5, 69, 73, 75, 79, 83, 85, 92, and 93 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 7, 8, 14, 25, 29, and 33 of copending Application No. 18/856569 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Please see below for the direct claim comparison.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application
18/856,569 (US PGPub 2025/0262517)
1. An alignment system configured for use in a skate sharpening system comprising:
a securing component configured to secure a skate blade within a skate sharpening system;
an alignment component positioned within a housing of the skate sharpening system;
a control system configured to control operation of the skate sharpening system; and
at least one measurement device configured to perform at least one measurement of at least one of component of the skate sharpening system,
the at least one measurement device including one or more:
lasers, position sensitive detectors, charge-couple devices, optical position sensors, or complementary metal oxide semiconductor photodetectors.
1. An ice skate blade measurement device comprising:
a frame configured to couple to an ice skate blade;
(see claims 14 and 25 below)
a measurement system configured to obtain measurement data associated with the ice skate blade; and
a control system with computer-executable instructions configured to, when executed:
determine, one or more measurements associated with geometry of the ice skate blade, and
generate, an output based at least in part on the one or more measurements.
14. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 1, wherein the measurement system further comprises a tilt bar, the tilt bar comprising a reflective surface.
25. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 14, wherein the measurement system further comprises a light emitting source configured to direct a light beam towards the reflective surface of the tilt bar and a sensor configured to receive a reflected light beam from the tilt bar.
Examiner notes that instant claim 85 is rejected over the combination of co-pending claims 1, 14, and 25
5. The alignment system of claim 1, wherein the at least one measurement device is configured to measure a location of an object in the securing component of the skate sharpening system.
29. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 25, wherein the one or more measurements associated with edges of the ice skate blade are determined based on a location of the reflected light beam on the sensor.
69. A measurement device comprising:
a frame configured to couple to a securing component of a skate sharpening system;
a measurement system configured to obtain measurement data associated with at least one component of the skate sharpening system; and
a control system with computer-executable instructions configured to, when executed:
determine at least one measurement of the at least one component of the skate sharpening system, and
generate an output based at least in part on the at least one measurement.
1. An ice skate blade measurement device comprising:
a frame configured to couple to an ice skate blade;
a measurement system configured to obtain measurement data associated with the ice skate blade; and
a control system with computer-executable instructions configured to, when executed:
determine, one or more measurements associated with geometry of the ice skate blade, and
generate, an output based at least in part on the one or more measurements.
73. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the output comprises human-readable instructions for a user to adjust at least one component of the skate sharpening system.
7. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 1, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to, when executed:
transmit, instructions for adjusting a skate sharpening device, the instructions determined based on the one or more measurements.
75. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to transmit instructions for adjusting one or more components of the skate sharpening system, the instructions for adjusting the one or more components of the skate sharpening system being machine-readable instructions for the skate sharpening system to automatically adjust at least one component of the skate sharpening system.
7. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 1, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to, when executed:
transmit, instructions for adjusting a skate sharpening device, the instructions determined based on the one or more measurements.
8. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 7, wherein the instructions include a modification to a position of a grinding wheel of the skate sharpening device, wherein the position of the grinding wheel is determined based on a desired edge modification to edges of the ice skate blade, and wherein the edge modification comprises sharpening the edges of the ice skate blade such that the edges have an equal height.
79. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the at least one measurement comprises a position of a target relative to a first axis of the skate sharpening system.
7. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 1, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to, when executed:
transmit, instructions for adjusting a skate sharpening device, the instructions determined based on the one or more measurements.
8. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 7, wherein the instructions include a modification to a position of a grinding wheel of the skate sharpening device, wherein the position of the grinding wheel is determined based on a desired edge modification to edges of the ice skate blade, and wherein the edge modification comprises sharpening the edges of the ice skate blade such that the edges have an equal height.
83. The measurement device of claim 79, wherein the target comprises a grinding wheel.
8. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 7, wherein the instructions include a modification to a position of a grinding wheel of the skate sharpening device, wherein the position of the grinding wheel is determined based on a desired edge modification to edges of the ice skate blade, and wherein the edge modification comprises sharpening the edges of the ice skate blade such that the edges have an equal height.
85. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the measurement system further comprises a light emitting source and a sensor.
25. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 14, wherein the measurement system further comprises a light emitting source configured to direct a light beam towards the reflective surface of the tilt bar and a sensor configured to receive a reflected light beam from the tilt bar.
Examiner notes that instant claim 85 is rejected over the combination of co-pending claims 1, 14, and 25
92. The measurement device of claim 69, further comprising an external housing, the frame positioned at least partially within the external housing.
33. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 1, further comprising an external housing, the frame positioned at least partially within the external housing, wherein the external housing comprises a plurality of resilient members extending into the frame, and wherein the plurality of resilient members are configured to allow the frame to move relatively to the housing.
93.The measurement device of claim 92, wherein the external housing comprises a plurality of resilient members extending into the frame, wherein the plurality of resilient members are configured to allow the frame to move relatively to the external housing.
33. The ice skate blade measurement device of claim 1, further comprising an external housing, the frame positioned at least partially within the external housing, wherein the external housing comprises a plurality of resilient members extending into the frame, and wherein the plurality of resilient members are configured to allow the frame to move relatively to the housing.
Claims 1, 5, 62-64, 66-69, 73, 75, 79, and 83 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, 5, 16-18 of U.S. Patent No. 11,919,119. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claim 65 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 11,919,119 in view of Proulx (US 2018/0126250).
Claims 81 and 82 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 16 and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,919,119 in view of Fowler (US 2020/0246933).
Please see below for direct claim comparisons.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent 11,919,119
(Examiner notes herein that the Patent was published as U.S. PGPub 2020/0016716) and is eligible as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1))
1. An alignment system configured for use in a skate sharpening system comprising:
a securing component configured to secure a skate blade within a skate sharpening system;
an alignment component positioned within a housing of the skate sharpening system;
a control system configured to control operation of the skate sharpening system; and
at least one measurement device configured to perform at least one measurement of at least one of component of the skate sharpening system, the at least one measurement device including one or more: lasers, position sensitive detectors, charge-couple devices, optical position sensors, or complementary metal oxide semiconductor photodetectors.
16. A skate blade sharpening system comprising:
a housing comprising a retention mechanism configured to secure a skate blade;
a motor-driven component configured to be movable within the housing of the skate blade sharpening system relative to the retention mechanism;
an alignment component positioned on the motor-driven component;
an adjustment mechanism configured to position the motor-driven component; and
a controller configured to:
control the operation of the adjustment mechanism;
analyze positions of a reference feature and the alignment component; and
operate the adjustment mechanism based on the analysis to position the motor-driven component such that the alignment component is brought into an alignment position with the reference feature.
18. The skate blade sharpening system of claim 16 further comprising a machine vision apparatus configured to determine positions of the reference feature and the alignment component.
5. The alignment system of claim 1, wherein the at least one measurement device is configured to measure a location of an object in the securing component of the skate sharpening system.
18. The skate blade sharpening system of claim 16 further comprising a machine vision apparatus configured to determine positions of the reference feature and the alignment component.
62. A method for operating a skate sharpening system comprising:
determining, by a control system of the skate sharpening system, a center location of a skate blade in a skate sharpening system using at least one measurement device;
determining, by the control system, a center location of a grinding wheel in a skate sharpening system using the at least one measurement device; and
generating, by the control system, instructions to align the center location of the skate blade with the center location of the grinding wheel.
1. A method of aligning a grinding component in a skate blade sharpening system, the method comprising:
positioning a reference feature within a retention mechanism of the skate blade sharpening system;
providing an alignment component on a motor-driven component, wherein the motor-driven component is movable within a housing of the skate blade sharpening system by an adjustment mechanism;
analyzing, by a controller, positions of the reference feature and the alignment component; and
(combination of claims 4 and 5):
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the centerline of the alignment component is a grinding component.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the alignment position aligns a centerline of the grinding component with a centerline of the skate blade.
Claim 1:
automatically operating, by the controller, the adjustment mechanism based on the analysis to position the motor-driven component such that the alignment component is brought into an alignment position with the reference feature.
63. The method of claim 62 further comprising automatically aligning the center location of the skate blade and the center location of the grinding wheel based on the instructions.
Claim 1:
automatically operating, by the controller, the adjustment mechanism based on the analysis to position the motor-driven component such that the alignment component is brought into an alignment position with the reference feature
Claim 4: wherein the centerline of the alignment component is a grinding component.
Claim 5: wherein the alignment position aligns a centerline of the grinding component with a centerline of the skate blade.
69. A measurement device comprising:
a frame configured to couple to a securing component of a skate sharpening system;
a measurement system configured to obtain measurement data associated with at least one component of the skate sharpening system; and
a control system with computer-executable instructions configured to, when executed:
determine at least one measurement of the at least one component of the skate sharpening system, and
generate an output based at least in part on the at least one measurement.
16. A skate blade sharpening system comprising:
a housing comprising a retention mechanism configured to secure a skate blade;
a motor-driven component configured to be movable within the housing of the skate blade sharpening system relative to the retention mechanism;
an alignment component positioned on the motor-driven component;
an adjustment mechanism configured to position the motor-driven component; and
a controller configured to:
control the operation of the adjustment mechanism;
analyze positions of a reference feature and the alignment component; and
operate the adjustment mechanism based on the analysis to position the motor-driven component such that the alignment component is brought into an alignment position with the reference feature.
75. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to transmit instructions for adjusting one or more components of the skate sharpening system, the instructions for adjusting the one or more components of the skate sharpening system being machine-readable instructions for the skate sharpening system to automatically adjust at least one component of the skate sharpening system.
Claim 16:
(…) a controller configured to:
control the operation of the adjustment mechanism;
analyze positions of a reference feature and the alignment component; and
operate the adjustment mechanism based on the analysis to position the motor-driven component such that the alignment component is brought into an alignment position with the reference feature.
79. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the at least one measurement comprises a position of a target relative to a first axis of the skate sharpening system.
Claim 16:
a controller configured to:
control the operation of the adjustment mechanism;
analyze positions of a reference feature and the alignment component; and
operate the adjustment mechanism based on the analysis to position the motor-driven component such that the alignment component is brought into an alignment position with the reference feature.
17. The skate blade sharpening system of claim 16, wherein the alignment component is a grinding component mounted on a mounting location on the motor-driven component.
83. The measurement device of claim 79, wherein the target comprises a grinding wheel.
Claim 16:
a controller configured to:
control the operation of the adjustment mechanism;
analyze positions of a reference feature and the alignment component; and
operate the adjustment mechanism based on the analysis to position the motor-driven component such that the alignment component is brought into an alignment position with the reference feature.
17. The skate blade sharpening system of claim 16, wherein the alignment component is a grinding component mounted on a mounting location on the motor-driven component
Instant Application
Obviousness Rejection using Patent in view of itself
64. The method of claim 63, wherein automatically aligning the center location of the skate blade and the center location of the grinding wheel is performed prior to a skate sharpening operation.
See the recitations of claims 1, 4, and 5, which are broad enough such that alignment does not take place at a specific instance, however, wherein [0311] discloses that the alignment takes places a result of alignment wheel 502, which is removed and then replaced with a grinding wheel, i.e. alignment prior to sharpening. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the timing of alignment to be prior to sharpening because the patent specifically suggests an embodiment in which this takes place.
66. The method of claim 63, outputting the instructions to a remote computing device, wherein the remote computing device is configured to output alignment instructions on a display based on the instructions.
67. The method of claim 63, outputting alignment instructions on a display of the skate sharpening system based on the instructions.
68. The method of claim 66, wherein the alignment instructions provide manual adjustments to the skate sharpening system for a user to manually align the center location of the skate blade with the center location of the grinding wheel.
73.The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the output comprises human-readable instructions for a user to adjust at least one component of the skate sharpening system.
The claimed invention as recited in the patent do not explicitly recite outputting the instructions to a remote computing device, wherein the remote computing device is configured to output alignment instructions on a display based on the instructions.
However, the specification discloses display panel 34, see also [0125], [0129], [0146-0147], [0185], [0279], [0282-0283], [0321]: the offset may be displayed in numbers or graphics to a human user who controls the adjustment.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the instructional steps because the patent specifically suggests an embodiment in which this takes place.
80. The measurement device of claim 79, wherein the target comprises a calibration wheel.
17. The skate blade sharpening system of claim 16, wherein the alignment component is a grinding component mounted on a mounting location on the motor-driven component.
Examiner’s note: under broadest reasonable interpretation, the grinding component in light of the disclosure comprises a grinding wheel, and wherein a calibration wheel 502 is also contemplated.
85. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the measurement system further comprises a light emitting source and a sensor.
Wherein the instant claim 85 is obvious over the patent claim 16 in view of the patent’s disclosure, please refer to the prior art rejection below regarding the claimed features, i.e. the light source and sensor, in an effort to reduce redundancy.
92. The measurement device of claim 69, further comprising an external housing, the frame positioned at least partially within the external housing.
93. The measurement device of claim 92, wherein the external housing comprises a plurality of resilient members extending into the frame, wherein the plurality of resilient members are configured to allow the frame to move relatively to the external housing.
Wherein the instant claims 92 and 93 are obvious over the patent claim 16 in view of the patent’s disclosure, please refer to the prior art rejection below regarding the claimed features in an effort to reduce redundancy.
Instant Application
Obviousness over U.S. Patent 11,919,119 in view of Proulx (US 2018/0126250)
65. The method of claim 63, wherein automatically aligning the center location of the skate blade and the center location of the grinding wheel is performed continuously during a skate sharpening operation.
The claims are rejected in view of the patent claims as applied above, however, the patent claims do not explicitly recite wherein automatically aligning the center location of the skate blade and the center location of the grinding wheel is performed continuously during a skate sharpening operation.
In an effort to reduce redundancy, please refer to the rejection of claim 65 over of Layton (2020/0016716), i.e. the PGPub of the patent, in view of Proulx (US 2018/0126250) provided below.
Instant Application
Obviousness over Patent 11,919,119 in view of Fowler (US 2020/0246933)
81. The measurement device of claim 80, wherein the calibration wheel comprises a reflective outer surface.
In an effort to reduce redundancy, please refer to the rejection of claims 81 and 82 over of Layton (2020/0016716), i.e. the PGPub of the patent, in view of Fowler (US 2020/0246933) provided below.
82. The measurement device of claim 81, where the reflective outer surface of the calibration wheel includes at least a radius portion, a curve of the radius portion extending about a second axis, the second axis perpendicular to the first axis.
Claims 62, 63, 69, 75, 79, and 83 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 13, and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 9,573,236. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Please see below for direct claim comparisons.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent 9,573,236
62. A method for operating a skate sharpening system comprising:
determining, by a control system of the skate sharpening system, a center location of a skate blade in a skate sharpening system using at least one measurement device;
determining, by the control system, a center location of a grinding wheel in a skate sharpening system using the at least one measurement device; and
generating, by the control system, instructions to align the center location of the skate blade with the center location of the grinding wheel.
Examiner’s Note: patent claim 14 recites a controller is the actor for aligning the first and second visual reference features, which are the centerlines of the sharpening position and centerline of the grinding wheel, i.e. instant claim 62 is obvious over the claims 1, 13, and 14.
1. A skate blade sharpening system, comprising:
a clamp configured to retain a skate blade in a sharpening position, a centerline of the sharpening position having a first predetermined location relative to a first visual reference feature of the skate sharpening system;
a motor-driven rotating shaft, the shaft having a wheel-mounting location at which a grinding wheel is mounted to rotate with the shaft and contact the skate blade in the sharpening position during a sharpening operation, the shaft also accepting an alignment wheel mounted at the wheel-mounting location during an alignment operation, the alignment wheel having a second visual reference feature that, when the alignment wheel occupies the wheel-mounting location, has a second predetermined location relative to a centerline of the grinding wheel when occupying the wheel-mounting location; and
an adjustment mechanism for moving the shaft transversely during the alignment operation to vary a relative position between the wheel-mounting location and the sharpening position across a range, the range including an aligned position of the wheel-mounting location in which the centerline of the grinding wheel when occupying the wheel-mounting location is aligned with the centerline of the sharpening position, the aligned position being indicated by alignment of the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature during the alignment operation.
13. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 1, further including: machine vision apparatus operative to perceive relative alignment between the first and second visual reference features and to generate a corresponding alignment signal indicating alignment status, the alignment status and the adjustment mechanism being used by a separate actor to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
14. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 13, wherein the adjustment mechanism is operative in response to an electrical adjustment signal, and wherein the separate actor includes a controller operative in response to the alignment signal to generate the electrical adjustment signal to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
63. The method of claim 62 further comprising automatically aligning the center location of the skate blade and the center location of the grinding wheel based on the instructions.
13. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 1, further including: machine vision apparatus operative to perceive relative alignment between the first and second visual reference features and to generate a corresponding alignment signal indicating alignment status, the alignment status and the adjustment mechanism being used by a separate actor to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
14. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 13, wherein the adjustment mechanism is operative in response to an electrical adjustment signal, and wherein the separate actor includes a controller operative in response to the alignment signal to generate the electrical adjustment signal to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
69. A measurement device comprising:
a frame configured to couple to a securing component of a skate sharpening system (see the skate blade sharpening system and clamp in patent claim 1);
a measurement system configured to obtain measurement data associated with at least one component of the skate sharpening system (see the machine vision apparatus recited in patent claim 13); and
a control system with computer-executable instructions configured to (see patent claims 13 and 14), when executed:
determine at least one measurement of the at least one component of the skate sharpening system, and
generate an output based at least in part on the at least one measurement.
1. A skate blade sharpening system, comprising:
a clamp configured to retain a skate blade in a sharpening position, a centerline of the sharpening position having a first predetermined location relative to a first visual reference feature of the skate sharpening system;
a motor-driven rotating shaft, the shaft having a wheel-mounting location at which a grinding wheel is mounted to rotate with the shaft and contact the skate blade in the sharpening position during a sharpening operation, the shaft also accepting an alignment wheel mounted at the wheel-mounting location during an alignment operation, the alignment wheel having a second visual reference feature that, when the alignment wheel occupies the wheel-mounting location, has a second predetermined location relative to a centerline of the grinding wheel when occupying the wheel-mounting location; and
an adjustment mechanism for moving the shaft transversely during the alignment operation to vary a relative position between the wheel-mounting location and the sharpening position across a range, the range including an aligned position of the wheel-mounting location in which the centerline of the grinding wheel when occupying the wheel-mounting location is aligned with the centerline of the sharpening position, the aligned position being indicated by alignment of the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature during the alignment operation.
13. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 1, further including: machine vision apparatus operative to perceive relative alignment between the first and second visual reference features and to generate a corresponding alignment signal indicating alignment status, the alignment status and the adjustment mechanism being used by a separate actor to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
14. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 13, wherein the adjustment mechanism is operative in response to an electrical adjustment signal, and wherein the separate actor includes a controller operative in response to the alignment signal to generate the electrical adjustment signal to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
75. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to transmit instructions for adjusting one or more components of the skate sharpening system, the instructions for adjusting the one or more components of the skate sharpening system being machine-readable instructions for the skate sharpening system to automatically adjust at least one component of the skate sharpening system.
13. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 1, further including: machine vision apparatus operative to perceive relative alignment between the first and second visual reference features and to generate a corresponding alignment signal indicating alignment status, the alignment status and the adjustment mechanism being used by a separate actor to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
14. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 13, wherein the adjustment mechanism is operative in response to an electrical adjustment signal, and wherein the separate actor includes a controller operative in response to the alignment signal to generate the electrical adjustment signal to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
79. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the at least one measurement comprises a position of a target relative to a first axis of the skate sharpening system.
13. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 1, further including: machine vision apparatus operative to perceive relative alignment between the first and second visual reference features and to generate a corresponding alignment signal indicating alignment status, the alignment status and the adjustment mechanism being used by a separate actor to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
14. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 13, wherein the adjustment mechanism is operative in response to an electrical adjustment signal, and wherein the separate actor includes a controller operative in response to the alignment signal to generate the electrical adjustment signal to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
83. The measurement device of claim 79, wherein the target comprises a grinding wheel.
See grinding wheel, first and second visual reference features, and adjustment recited in patent claims 1, 13, and14 above.
Claims 62, 63, 69, 75, 79, and 83 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 13, and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 9,242,330. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Please see below for the direct claim comparisons.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent 9,242,330
62. A method for operating a skate sharpening system comprising:
determining, by a control system of the skate sharpening system, a center location of a skate blade in a skate sharpening system using at least one measurement device (see controller recited in patent claim 14);
determining, by the control system, a center location of a grinding wheel in a skate sharpening system using the at least one measurement device (see the first and second predetermined locations as claimed in the patent claims); and
generating, by the control system, instructions to align the center location of the skate blade with the center location of the grinding wheel (see patent claims 13 and 14).
1. A skate blade sharpening system, comprising:
a clamp configured to retain a skate blade in a sharpening position, a centerline of the sharpening position having a first predetermined location relative to a first visual reference feature of the skate sharpening system;
a grinding wheel configured to contact the skate blade in the sharpening position during sharpening, the grinding wheel being mounted for rotation on a motor arm, a centerline of the grinding wheel having a second predetermined location relative to a second visual reference feature carried by the motor arm; and
an adjustment mechanism for moving the motor arm transversely during an alignment operation to vary a relative position between the grinding wheel and the sharpening position across a range including an aligned position in which the centerline of the grinding wheel is aligned with the centerline of the sharpening position, the aligned position being indicated by alignment of the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
13. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 1, further including: machine vision apparatus operative to perceive relative alignment between the first and second visual reference features and to generate a corresponding alignment signal indicating alignment status, the alignment status and the adjustment mechanism being used by a separate actor to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
14. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 13, wherein the adjustment mechanism is operative in response to an electrical adjustment signal, and wherein the separate actor includes a controller operative in response to the alignment signal to generate the electrical adjustment signal to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
63. The method of claim 62 further comprising automatically aligning the center location of the skate blade and the center location of the grinding wheel based on the instructions.
Please see patent claims 1, 13, and 14 provided above.
69. A measurement device comprising:
a frame configured to couple to a securing component of a skate sharpening system (wherein patent claim recites a clamp and a skate blade sharpening system, as well as arms; );
a measurement system configured to obtain measurement data associated with at least one component of the skate sharpening system (wherein patent claim 13 recites a machine vision apparatus operative to perceive alignment); and
a control system with computer-executable instructions (see controller in patent claim 14) configured to, when executed:
determine at least one measurement of the at least one component of the skate sharpening system, and generate an output based at least in part on the at least one measurement (please see the combination of patent claims 1, 13, and 14).
75. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to transmit instructions for adjusting one or more components of the skate sharpening system, the instructions for adjusting the one or more components of the skate sharpening system being machine-readable instructions for the skate sharpening system to automatically adjust at least one component of the skate sharpening system.
79. The measurement device of claim 69, wherein the at least one measurement comprises a position of a target relative to a first axis of the skate sharpening system.
83. The measurement device of claim 79, wherein the target comprises a grinding wheel.
1. A skate blade sharpening system, comprising:
a clamp configured to retain a skate blade in a sharpening position, a centerline of the sharpening position having a first predetermined location relative to a first visual reference feature of the skate sharpening system;
a grinding wheel configured to contact the skate blade in the sharpening position during sharpening, the grinding wheel being mounted for rotation on a motor arm, a centerline of the grinding wheel having a second predetermined location relative to a second visual reference feature carried by the motor arm; and
an adjustment mechanism for moving the motor arm transversely during an alignment operation to vary a relative position between the grinding wheel and the sharpening position across a range including an aligned position in which the centerline of the grinding wheel is aligned with the centerline of the sharpening position, the aligned position being indicated by alignment of the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
13. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 1, further including: machine vision apparatus operative to perceive relative alignment between the first and second visual reference features and to generate a corresponding alignment signal indicating alignment status, the alignment status and the adjustment mechanism being used by a separate actor to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
14. A skate blade sharpening system according to claim 13, wherein the adjustment mechanism is operative in response to an electrical adjustment signal, and wherein the separate actor includes a controller operative in response to the alignment signal to generate the electrical adjustment signal to align the first visual reference feature with the second visual reference feature.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s 1 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Frommer (US 2011/0247460).
Regarding claim 1, Frommer discloses an alignment system configured for use in a skate sharpening system (see Abstract as well as [0055-0058]) comprising:
a securing component configured to secure a skate blade within a skate sharpening system (see at least the shoes configured to hold a different thickness of skate blade 12, as well as [0083-0084]; see also slot 24; see also [0081-0084] );
an alignment component positioned within a housing of the skate sharpening system (see at least skate blade orienting structure 16, as well as [0058-0059]; see also [0081-0084]);
a control system configured to control operation of the skate sharpening system (see controller 114, as well as [0089-0090]); and
at least one measurement device configured to perform at least one measurement of at least one of component of the skate sharpening system (see at least one of sensors 108, 116, and 126; see [0088], [0090-0093], [0105]), the at least one measurement device including one or more:
lasers, position sensitive detectors, charge-couple devices, optical position sensors, or complementary metal oxide semiconductor photodetectors ([0093]: sensor 126 may comprise a capacitive sensor, item engagement sensor disclosed in [0094]; [0088]: engagement sensor 108 may comprise a switch; see also [0091-0092] regarding sensors 116).
Regarding claim 5, Frommer discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Frommer further discloses wherein the at least one measurement device is configured to measure a location of an object in the securing component of the skate sharpening system (wherein the engagement sensors 116 are ahead and behind of the sharpening base 24 and are switched when the blade enters the slot 24, signaling proper location and engagement; see [0091-0092]; see also imperfection sensor 126 which detects an imperfection by changing capacitance upon exposure to an imperfection, i.e. correlated to the location of the imperfection; see also [0093]; see also engagement sensor 108, as well as [0088]).
Claim(s) 1, 5, 61-64, 66-69, 73, 75, 79, 80, 83, 85, 92, and 93 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Layton (US 2020/0016716).
Regarding claim 1, Layton discloses an alignment system configured for use in a skate sharpening system (see Abstract) comprising:
a securing component configured to secure a skate blade within a skate sharpening system (see jaws 90, [0140], [0142]: the skate blade is inserted through the slot 24 between the jaws 90, and the user then rotates the clamp paddle 26 to close the jaws 90 on the skate blade);
an alignment component positioned within a housing of the skate sharpening system (see alignment tool 440; alignment wheel 502, see also [0310-0311]);
a control system configured to control operation of the skate sharpening system (see [0321]: a controller can then perform the process of FIG. 28 or FIG. 35 based on position information from the position-monitoring apparatus and by generating the electrical adjustment signal to change the relative positions of the respective components accordingly until an aligned position is detected; see Figures 28 and 35); and
at least one measurement device configured to perform at least one measurement of at least one of component of the skate sharpening system (see [0146], [0317-0321]), the at least one measurement device including one or more:
lasers, position sensitive detectors, charge-couple devices, optical position sensors, or complementary metal oxide semiconductor photodetectors ([0146]: sensors can be used to detect whether a skate is properly positioned for sharpening).
Regarding claim 5, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses wherein the at least one measurement device is configured to measure a location of an object in the securing component of the skate sharpening system (see [0317-0320] regarding the location of reference features located on objects, we well as the detection of aligned position disclosed in [0321]).
Regarding claim 62, Layton discloses a method for operating a skate sharpening system (see Abstract) comprising:
determining, by a control system of the skate sharpening system, a center location of a skate blade in a skate sharpening system using at least one measurement device ([0020]: the alignment of the second visual reference feature with the first visual reference feature aligns the centerline of the grinding component with a centerline of the skate blade; see also [0276], [0279], [0321]: a controller can then perform the process of FIG. 28 or FIG. 35 based on position information from the position-monitoring apparatus and by generating the electrical adjustment signal to change the relative positions of the respective components accordingly until an aligned position is detected);
determining, by the control system, a center location of a grinding wheel in a skate sharpening system using the at least one measurement device (see at least [0318-0321]; [0022]: the second visual reference feature is positioned at a defined distance from a centerline of a grinding portion of a grinding component when the grinding component is mounted on a mounting location on the motor-driven component; [0321]: a controller can then perform the process of FIG. 28 or FIG. 35 based on position information from the position-monitoring apparatus and by generating the electrical adjustment signal to change the relative positions of the respective components accordingly until an aligned position is detected); and
generating, by the control system, instructions to align the center location of the skate blade with the center location of the grinding wheel ([0173]; [0276]: wherein the centerline of the grinding wheel is aligned with a centerline of a sharpening position of a skate blade; see also [0283-0284], [0288]; see also [0318-0321]; [0290], [0321]).
Regarding claim 63, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses further comprising automatically aligning the center location of the skate blade and the center location of the grinding wheel based on the instructions ([0321]: a controller can then perform the process of FIG. 28 or FIG. 35 based on position information from the position-monitoring apparatus and by generating the electrical adjustment signal to change the relative positions of the respective components accordingly until an aligned position is detected).
Regarding claim 64, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses wherein automatically aligning the center location of the skate blade and the center location of the grinding wheel is performed prior to a skate sharpening operation (wherein [0311] discloses that the alignment takes places a result of alignment wheel 502, which is removed and then replaced with a grinding wheel, i.e. alignment prior to sharpening; wherein [0321] discloses a controller can then perform the process of FIG. 28 or FIG. 35 based on position information from the position-monitoring apparatus and by generating the electrical adjustment signal to change the relative positions of the respective components accordingly until an aligned position is detected).
Regarding claim 66, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses outputting the instructions to a remote computing device, wherein the remote computing device is configured to output alignment instructions on a display based on the instructions (see display panel 34, [0125], [0129], [0146-0147], [0185], [0279], [0282-0283], [0321]: the offset may be displayed in numbers or graphics to a human user who controls the adjustment).
Regarding claim 67, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses outputting alignment instructions on a display of the skate sharpening system based on the instructions ([0321]: the offset may be displayed in numbers or graphics to a human user who controls the adjustment; see also display panel 34, [0125], [0129], [0146-0147], [0185], [0279], [0282-0283]).
Regarding claim 68, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses wherein the alignment instructions provide manual adjustments to the skate sharpening system for a user to manually align the center location of the skate blade with the center location of the grinding wheel (please refer to [0321], as well as [0125], [0129], [0146-0147], [0185], [0279], [0282-0283]).
Regarding claim 69, Layton discloses a measurement device comprising:
a frame configured to couple to a securing component (see slot cover 28, which coupled with the jaws 90 such that the jaws, i.e. the skate blade holder, is clamped; see [0229], [0125]; see Figure 25) of a skate sharpening system (see Figure 5);
a measurement system configured to obtain measurement data associated with at least one component of the skate sharpening system ([0321]: machine vision or other apparatus may be used to monitor relative position between the grinding wheel 36 and alignment tool or between the alignment wheel 502 and the alignment tool); and
a control system with computer-executable instructions configured to, when executed: determine at least one measurement of the at least one component of the skate sharpening system, and generate an output based at least in part on the at least one measurement ([0321]: a controller can perform the process of Figure 28 or Figure 35 based on position information from the position monitoring apparatus, or the offset is displayed in numbers or graphics to a human user; see at least Figures 28 and 35; see also [0282]).
Regarding claim 73, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses wherein the output comprises human-readable instructions for a user to adjust at least one component of the skate sharpening system (([0321]: a controller can perform the process of Figure 28 or Figure 35 based on position information from the position monitoring apparatus, or the offset is displayed in numbers or graphics to a human user for adjustment; see at least Figures 28 and 35; see also [0282]).
Regarding claim 75, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured to transmit instructions for adjusting one or more components of the skate sharpening system, the instructions for adjusting the one or more components of the skate sharpening system being machine-readable instructions for the skate sharpening system to automatically adjust at least one component of the skate sharpening system ([0022]: In some configurations, the system includes a controller configured to control operation of the adjustment mechanism and automatically position the motor-driven component such that the second visual reference is brought into alignment with the first visual reference feature; see also [0321]).
Regarding claim 79, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses wherein the at least one measurement comprises a position of a target relative to a first axis of the skate sharpening system (see at least [0317-0321]; see also [0022], as well as Figures 28 and 25).
Regarding claim 80, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses wherein the target comprises a calibration wheel (see alignment wheel 502, [0310-0311]).
Regarding claim 83, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses wherein the target comprises a grinding wheel (see grinding wheel 36, as well as [0279-0280], Figures 28 and 35).
Regarding claim 85, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses wherein the measurement system further comprises a light emitting source and a sensor ([0146]: sensors or switches can be used to detect whether a skate is properly positioned for sharpening; see also [0349-0350]; [0278]: The LED can be illuminated when the grinding wheel is being aligned. For example, in configurations having an alignment mode, the lighting feature in, on or around the jaw guard can be activated when the skate sharpening device enters into the alignment mode or at some time period during the alignment mode. The lighting feature thereby can illuminate the area surrounding the alignment features).
Regarding claim 92, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses further comprising an external housing, the frame positioned at least partially within the external housing (wherein slot cover 28 is positioned at least partly within frame 12, see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 93, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Layton further discloses wherein the external housing comprises a plurality of resilient members extending into the frame, wherein the plurality of resilient members are configured to allow the frame to move relatively to the external housing (see Figure 16; see slot cover 28, spring 310, bumper 29, button 28, see also [0191-0193]; [0226]; [0228-0229], [0232-0233]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 65 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Layton (US 20200016716) in view of Proulx (US 2018/0126250).
Regarding claim 65, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above. However, while Layton intimates and suggests alternative operations, Layton does not explicitly teach wherein automatically aligning the center location of the skate blade and the center location of the grinding wheel is performed continuously during a skate sharpening operation.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor of devices configured to sharpen a skate blade, Proulx teaches automatically aligning the center location of the skate blade and the center location of the grinding wheel is performed continuously during a skate sharpening operation ([0017]: a controller is operatively coupled to the blade sharpening device and the blade holding apparatus, and is configured to control sharpening of the blade according to the measured shape of the blade during sharpening; wherein [0120-0121] teaches the sensor may measure the shape of the blade at the same time of sharpening, and the shape of a part of a blade may be measured during simultaneous sharpening; wherein the centerline of the grinding wheel is configured to be in longitudinal alignment with the centerline of the edge of the blade; wherein [0122] teaches of controlling movement of the grinding assembly 30 according to the shape of the blade; wherein [0124] discloses the drive 36 includes a feedback mechanism to control the mechanical position during grinding; see also [0024-0025], [0038-0046], [0050], [0052-0059], [0068-0069], [0075], [0128], [0130-0138], [0148], [0171-0172], [0181]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the continuous adjustment of the apparatus during operation, as taught by Proulx, into the invention of Layton. Layton not only intimates and suggests alternatives in at least [0321], but one would be motivated to do so because incorporation of the features of Proulx would increase alignment accuracy, thus reducing waste caused by excessive removal of blade material, and would additionally reduce costs as a result (see [0011]).
Claim(s) 81 and 82 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Layton (US 20200016716) in view of Fowler (US 2020/0246933).
Regarding claim 81, Layton discloses the claimed invention as applied above. However, while Layton intimates and suggests alternative operations, Layton does not explicitly teach the alignment wheel (502) has a reflective outer surface.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Fowler teaches of using a reflective outer surface in combination with sensor(s) in order to detect an object and control operation of a sharpening device using the detected results (see at least [0036-0038], [0052], and Figures 3, 5A, 5B, 9A, 9B, 10; see also [0022], [0024], [0028-0030], [0059], [0062], [0064]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the use of a reflective surface into an object being measured within the context of controlling the operation and position of a sharpening apparatus, as taught by Fowler, into invention of Layton, i.e. the alignment wheel surface. Fowler suggests a wide variety of configurations for measuring and detecting, including, inter alia, by capacitance of inductance ([0045]), camera inspection ([0040], [0055]), reflection of impinging light ([0036]), and/or scanning profilometer ([0048]). Layton also provides a wide variety of alignment tools/methods, including alignment tool (440), alignment tool (512), alignment wheel (502), and specifically suggests modifications including a machine vision or apparatus used to monitor relative position between elements [0320-0321]. One would be motivated to combine in the sensor and reflective surface configuration as taught by Fowler because the in situ measurements would provide additional accuracy in comparison with an alignment notch, i.e. increasing the automated control of the system in an alternative manner. This modification would be recognized as using a known technique, i.e. reflective surfaces and sensors, to improve a similar sharpening device in a similar manner, and would yield predictable results with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 82, Layton in view of Fowler teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified Layton further teaches where the reflective outer surface of the calibration wheel includes at least a radius portion, a curve of the radius portion extending about a second axis, the second axis perpendicular to the first axis (Layton: referring to Figures 30 and 31, the alignment wheel 502 is shown as having a circumferential outer surface, wherein the combination as applied above incorporates a reflective surface sensing configuration, i.e. the combination of prior art teaches the claimed invention under broadest reasonable interpretation).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chan (US 20180028898), see Abstract.
Vogel (US 2017/0087690), see Abstract and Figure 1.
Christenson (US 9,079,284), see Abstract.
Wilson (US 8277284), see Abstract and Figures 10, 14-18
Swist (US 20120105151), see Figures 3, 6, and 7.
Erikkson (US 20060040587), see Figures 1 and 2.
Strain (US 5,601,473), see Figures 2, 10, and Abstract.
Tschida (US 5,287,657), see Abstract
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAKENA S MARKMAN whose telephone number is (469)295-9162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 am-6:00pm.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/MAKENA S MARKMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723