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 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 1, 2, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) the idea of making an optical sheet which includes steps which are only related to ideas and not their practical application involving steps which are required to be taken in the real world. Detecting a center, determining a position for a cut¸ and the use of polarized light are all things which can occur in the mind—and not through a specific technical means. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because there are no technological steps. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the steps are mental or the idea is abstract without an integration into a technical means for performing the steps. An inventive concept "cannot be furnished by the unpatentable law of nature (or natural phenomenon or abstract idea) itself." Genetic Techs. Ltd. v. Merial LLC, 818 F.3d 1369, 1376, 118 USPQ2d 1541, 1546 (Fed. Cir. 2016). See also Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 21-18, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 78, 101 USPQ2d at 1968 (after determining that a claim is directed to a judicial exception, "we then ask, ‘[w]hat else is there in the claims before us?") (emphasis added)); RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co., 855 F.3d 1322, 1327, 122 USPQ2d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2017) ("Adding one abstract idea (math) to another abstract idea (encoding and decoding) does not render the claim non-abstract"). Instead, an "inventive concept" is furnished by an element or combination of elements that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception, and is sufficient to ensure that the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 27-18, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72-73, 101 USPQ2d at 1966). Here, the abstract idea is using polarized light to determine positions—but that idea is not refined into any technology at all—it is encompassing of the idea itself, and does not require anything beyond the idea per se.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6,8, 10-20 contain additional elements which amount to significantly more than an abstract idea, and are not rejectable over prior art as follows. They are objected to as depending from a rejected base claim. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: claim 1 is representative of the subject matter and is most aptly compared with the closest art known—cited by applicant as JP 2006-179122 to Hitachi. Hitachi discloses a method of manufacturing an optical disk including the relevant steps of determining the concentric center of the pattern by image analysis of the sheet forms. However, there is no indication in Hitachi or the art in general that the identification of the concentric center may be interpreted by the inclusion of “performing irradiation with linearly polarized light.” While polarized light is broadly known, this application of irradiating optical discs to control the concentricity of the cutting is not specifically known, nor motivated to create from those features known in the art of punch/ cutting (or other cutting). In the combinations with stated specific elements within claims 3,-6,8, 10-18, the subject matter becomes concrete and tangible, and is therefore not rejected under a §101 rationale. For similar reasons with respect to claim 9, the presence of an image capturing device which exists in and through the opening of the punch mechanism, in concert with the other known features (e.g. base, punch, table, sheet …) is not known nor obvious in light of those types of devices. This is discouraged by relevant reference 20190315011, which notes that perpendicular imaging is not utilized—“Since this feature is within the area of the web designated to be the individual part itself, which is also within the active punch area (conversions zone) of the press used for the conversion process, positioning of the image capturing device used to image the feature is therefore mechanically constrained. In other words, it is not generally practical to image features on web in a part of the web within the punch area at an angle perpendicular to the web. Because of this, for standard imaging devices, it is then not possible to focus across the entire image of the feature contained within the area of the web designated to become the individual product, and therefore not generally possible to accurately register the feature using standard techniques. Hence, the common practice of using an added fiducial mark outside the punch area resulting in the ensuing accuracy limitations.” The angle of the imaging is therefore off- angle as shown, which is different to, and teaching away of, the present application’s location for punch incorporated image processing. Claim 9 is allowable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN M MICHALSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-6752. The examiner can normally be reached Typically M-F 6a-3:30p East Coast Time.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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.
SEAN M. MICHALSKI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3724
/SEAN M MICHALSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724