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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to application filed on October 23, 2024. Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the application.
Drawings
The drawings filed on October 23, 2024 are acknowledged and are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
As to claim 1, claim recites “A method for iterative design using a computer numerical control (CNC) machine for automated changing of a CNC computer design program controlling the CNC machine comprising:
installing an executable application to the CNC computer design program, the executable application comprising a plurality of instructions which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to:
display a customer tab on a home screen of the CNC computer design program, wherein the customer tab displays a plurality of icons; and
synchronizing settings of the CNC computer design program to settings on the CNC machine so the settings on the CNC computer design program mirror the settings on the CNC machine when an import icon of the plurality of icons is selected.”
At a high level, the claim is directed to:
installing software,
displaying a GUI tab with icons, and
synchronizing settings between two systems when an icon is selected.
Under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis (as explained in MPEP 2106), we determine whether the claim is directed to a statutory category of patentable subject matter. It is noted that claims 1-20 are directed to at least one potentially eligible statutory category of subject matter (i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). Thus Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility test for claims 1-20 is satisfied.
Under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the claim limitations constitute an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that the fall into/recite abstract idea as:
collecting or transferring data,
displaying information, and
using generic computer functionality to perform routine synchronization.
In claim 1, the recited steps have been characterized as directed to an abstract idea, namely:
managing or synchronizing configuration information,
organizing or manipulating data,
displaying information through a graphical user interface, therefore, they are considered to be an abstract idea.
Next, under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application. In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
The claim comprises the following additional elements:
a CNC machine,
a CNC computer design program,
synchronization of settings.
However, the synchronization is described only functionally:
“…synchronizing settings… so the settings… mirror…”
The claim does not explain:
how synchronization occurs,
what technical problem existed,
what technical mechanism is used,
whether synchronization changes machine operation,
whether machining itself is improved.
Therefore, as claimed, the CNC machine is merely an environment in which the software operates.
Under Step 2B, the additional elements appear to be:
processor
executable application
GUI
icons
The additional elements have been considered individually and in combination, but fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they are well-understood, routine, and conventional computer functions, and amount to using the generic computing elements or instructions (software) to perform the abstract idea, similar to adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent), or generally link the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, which is not sufficient to amount to a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and 2106.05(h).
In conclusion, the additional elements, considered individually and in combination with the other claim elements do not reflect an improvement to other technology or technical field, do not reflect improvements to the functioning of the computer itself, do not recite a particular machine, do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, and, therefore, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claim, therefore, is not patent eligible.
Similar to independent claim 1 discussed above, independent claims 17 and 19 are likewise directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Claims 2-16, 18, and 20 recite additional features or steps that, when considered individually and in combination, merely further define or narrow the abstract idea recited in independent claims 1, 17, and 19. These additional limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, but instead represent insignificant extra-solution activity or conventional elements that do not impose a meaningful limitation on the claimed abstract idea.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. § 101 set forth in this Office action.
Regarding claim 1, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter over the prior art: The prior arts of record do not expressly teach or render obvious,
“A method for iterative design using a computer numerical control (CNC) machine for automated changing of a CNC computer design program controlling the CNC machine comprising:
installing an executable application to the CNC computer design program, the executable application comprising a plurality of instructions which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to:
display a customer tab on a home screen of the CNC computer design program, wherein the customer tab displays a plurality of icons; and
synchronizing settings of the CNC computer design program to settings on the CNC machine so the settings on the CNC computer design program mirror the settings on the CNC machine when an import icon of the plurality of icons is selected.”
Trounson, III (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0125068; hereinafter as, “Trounson”) teaches an integrated CAD/CAM/CNC software platform with processor-executed applications, GUI tabs, automatic propagation of CAD/CAM changes, unified tooling information, and synchronization of manufacturing data across the integrated environment. It therefore teaches several broad concepts underlying iterative CNC design (see e.g., para. [0099]-[0101], [0106]-[0114], [0127]-[0128], [0137]-[0149]).
However, Trounson does not teach the claim as a whole because if fails to disclose several key limitations, including:
installing an executable application to an existing CNC computer design program;
displaying a customer tab on a home screen;
the customer tab displaying a plurality of icons;
selecting an import icon;
synchronizing the CNC computer design program settings to mirror the CNC machine settings in response to the selection of the import icon.
Additionally, Ould et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2007/0250204; hereinafter as, “Ould”) teaches an icon-based GUI for editing CNC programs (see e.g., para. [0017], [0037]-[0045]), while Saylor et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2013/0125044; hereinafter as, “Saylor”) addresses editing of an existing part program through a graphical editor and discloses instruction representations that may be displayed as icons (see e.g., para. [0114]-[0130]).
Accordingly, Ould and Saylor, strengthens the teachings of graphical editing and icon-based user interfaces. However, the combination still fails to disclose the specific “customer tab/import icon/settings synchronization” functionality required by claim 1.
Dependent claims 2-16 are indicated as allowable for at least being dependent on, and further limiting, independent claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter over the prior art: The prior arts of record do not expressly teach or render obvious,
“A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising a plurality of instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to:
display a customer tab on a home screen of the CNC computer design program, wherein the customer tab displays a plurality of icons for an automotive iterative design process;
synchronizing settings of the CNC computer design program to settings on the CNC machine so the settings on the CNC computer design program mirror the settings on the CNC machine when an import icon of the plurality of icons is selected;
adjust one of a plurality of geometrical components of an automotive workpiece being formed by the CNC machine when one of a plurality of geometry icons of the plurality of icons is selected;
shade different curves on the automotive workpiece being formed by the CNC machine different user selected colors on a display, wherein each color assigned is based on a curve radius when a shading icon of the plurality of icons is selected;
update a moveable limit setting on the CNC computer design program to a current movable limit setting on the CNC machine when a refresh icon of the plurality of icons is selected;
display a user drawn box on the display to visually show movable limits of the CNC machine when a draw icon of the plurality of icons is selected and to remove the user drawn box when a hide icon of the plurality of icons is selected;
make user selected surfaces of the automotive workpiece being formed by the CNC machine shown on the display invisible when an invisible icon of the plurality of icons is selected, and to make visible the user selected surfaces that were invisible when an unblank icon of the plurality of icons is selected; and
adjust a first point and a last point of a selected toolpath when an adjust icon of the plurality of icons is selected.”
A combination of Trounson, Ould, and Saylor does not teach or suggest several core limitations, including:
a customer tab on a home screen,
icons for the claimed automotive iterative design workflow,
an import icon that synchronizes and mirrors CNC machine settings into the design program,
curve-radius based color shading,
refreshing movable limits from the machine,
drawing/hiding a movable-limit box,
hide/unblank surface functionality, and
the specific adjust icon for adjusting the first and last points of a selected toolpath.
Dependent claim 18 is indicated as allowable for at least being dependent on, and further limiting, independent claim 17.
Regarding claim 19, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter over the prior art: The prior arts of record do not expressly teach or render obvious,
“A method for iterative design using a computer numerical control (CNC) machine for automated changing of a CNC computer design program controlling the CNC machine, the method implemented using a control system including a processor communicatively coupled to a memory device, the method comprising:
display a customer tab on a home screen of the CNC computer design program, wherein the customer tab displays a plurality of icons, selecting corresponding icons of the plurality of icons synchronizes settings on the CNC computer design program to settings on the CNC machine, generates a new toolpath, edits geometric settings of a workpiece, shades curves of the workpiece different colors based on curve radiuses, displays and hides selected surfaces of the workpiece; and adjusts a first point and a last point of any selected tool path.”
Trounson alone or in combination with Ould and Saylor does not teach or suggest all the claimed features. Although the references disclose graphical editing interfaces with parameter-entry windows, they do not teach or suggest several core limitations, including:
customer tab on the home screen,
synchronization of CAD/CAM settings with CNC machine settings,
generation of a new toolpath through the claimed interface,
geometric editing of the workpiece,
curve-radius based color shading,
hide/show workpiece surfaces,
adjustment of first and last points of a selected toolpath.
Dependent claim 20 is indicated as allowable for at least being dependent on, and further limiting, independent claim 19.
In addition, the foreign references submitted in the IDS filed on October 23, 2024 have been considered. None of the references, either alone or in combination, teaches or suggests all of the limitations of independent claims 1, 17, and 19. While several references disclose PowerMILL user interfaces, toolpath templates, or automation, none teaches or suggests the limitations previously identified as distinguishing independent claims 1, 17, and 19 from the prior art. Accordingly, the pending claims are considered to define over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADNAN AZIZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-7536, (Fax: 571-270-8536). The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (9am - 6pm Eastern 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, QUAN-ZHEN WANG can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/ADNAN AZIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685 adnan.aziz@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights