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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the arc surface tangent to an edge of the tooth root (claim 11) should be shown in at least one figure. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With respect to claim 7, limitations the height of the welding teeth that protrude from the welding mark end surface gradually increase along a direction from the middle portion to two ends; and alternatively the height of portions of the welding teeth that protrude from the welding mark end surface gradually decrease along a direction from the middle portion to two ends…are ambiguous because they are contradictory and only one alternative (either increasing or decreasing) is true at a given time. It appears that claim should recite “OR, alternatively”. The recited conflicting language fails to clearly set forth the scope, rendering the claim indefinite. For purpose of examination and in accordance with broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, the claim is taken to mean: OR alternatively (either increasing or decreasing height of the welding teeth meets the claim).
With respect to claim 11, feature of wherein the arc surface is tangent to an edge of the tooth root (line 3) is ambiguous because it is unclear how the arc or curved surface is tangent to an edge. None of applicant’s figures illustrate an edge and the arc surface being tangent to the edge of the tooth (note drawing objection above); it is also noted that arc surface is circular by nature and is unlikely to be perpendicular or tangent. Consequently, ordinary artisan would not be able to determine the scope of the recited vague language, rendering the claim indefinite. For purpose of examination and in accordance with broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, the claim is taken to mean: wherein a region of the welding mark end surface between two adjacent welding teeth is recessed into an arc surface.
Appropriate corrections are requested.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7-11, 13 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Popoola et al. (US 6523732, hereafter “Popoola”).
Regarding claims 1 and 16, Popoola discloses an ultrasonic welding apparatus comprising a processing mechanism (figs. 1-5), including: a welding head 12 (sonotrode- fig. 1), wherein the welding head has a welding mark end surface 28 (spherical outer surface- col. 3, line 1) at an end in a second direction, and a middle portion of the welding mark end surface in a first direction protrudes away from the welding head, so that the welding mark end surface 28 is curved in an arch shape (figs. 2, 3-4); wherein a plurality of welding teeth 42 (lands) are distributed on the welding mark end surface (fig. 2-2a); wherein the first direction (x-direction) is parallel to a reciprocating movement direction 16 (fig. 1) of reciprocating vibration of the welding head during welding; the second direction is a length direction (z-direction 38- fig. 2) of the welding head; and the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction (fig. 1).
As to claim 2, Popoola shows that a cross-section of the welding mark end surface parallel to the first direction is in an arc shape (fig. 2).
As to claim 3, Popoola discloses that a plane passing through the middle portion of the welding head 12 in the first direction and perpendicular to the first direction is an intermediate plane (along line 38- fig. 2), and two opposite sides of the welding mark end surface on the intermediate plane are respectively a first region and a second region; wherein the first region and the second region are symmetrically arranged with respect to the intermediate plane (fig. 2). Examiner notes that features of first region and second region are open to any area and not limited by specific shape or dimensions. It is also noted that limitation of bending amplitude is optional due to ‘or’.
As to claim 7, Popoola shows that the height of portions of the welding teeth 42 that protrude from the welding mark end surface 28 gradually decrease along a direction from the middle portion to two ends of the welding mark end surface in the first direction (fig. 2a).
As to claims 8-10, Popoola discloses that points on the welding teeth that are farthest from the welding mark end surface in the second direction are far end points, wherein a surface on which a plurality of far end points are located is a far end surface, the far end surface is a plane, and the second direction 38 is perpendicular to the far end surface (fig. 2a); wherein any two adjacent welding teeth on the welding mark end surface are spaced apart; an end of each of the welding teeth close to the welding mark end surface is a tooth root, wherein a joint between a surface of the tooth root and the welding mark end surface is a smooth curved surface (fig. 2a).
As to claim 11, Popoola shows that a region of the welding mark end surface between two adjacent welding teeth 42 is recessed into an arc surface (fig. 2a). Examiner notes this claim is indefinite in scope.
As to claim 13, Popoola shows that wherein edges of two ends of the welding head in the first direction are each provided with a first rounded corner; (figs. 2, 4). The term ‘and/or’ is taken to mean ‘or’ and thus, feature is optional.
As to claim 15, Popoola discloses that the processing mechanism further comprises a supporting body, wherein the welding head is mounted on the supporting body (fig. 1).
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.
Claims 4-6, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popoola et al. (US 6523732, hereafter “Popoola”) in view of Shi et al. (CN-215919402-U, see attached document).
As to claim 4, Popoola discloses points on the welding teeth that are farthest from the welding mark end surface in a direction perpendicular to the welding mark end surface are far points, wherein a surface on which a plurality of far points are located is a far surface (figs. 2-2a), but lacks the far surface being curved or arch shape. However, such protrusion/teeth shape is known in the welding art. Analogous to Popoola, Shi (also directed to ultrasonic welding apparatus- abstract) teaches a welding head 1 having a welding mark end surface and a plurality of welding teeth 2 distributed in rectangular array on welding mark end surface, wherein the teeth 2 are of spherical shape (figs. 1, 4). The points on the welding teeth 2 that are farthest from the welding mark end surface are far points, wherein a surface on which a plurality of far points are located is a far surface, which is curved or arch-shape (fig. 1). Shi discloses that such curved/spherical shape not only ensures the penetration of the welding workpiece 7, but also prevents damage to surface welding and lug cracking [0027]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide spherical welding teeth similar to Shi in the welding head tip of Popoola because doing so would ensure penetration of the welding workpiece(s) and also prevent damage to surface welding as well as cracking.
As to claim 5, both Popoola and Shi shows that the far surface is parallel to the welding mark end surface.
As to claim 6, Shi discloses the height of portions of the welding teeth 2 that protrude from the welding mark end surface are equal (figs. 1-4). Popoola discloses other tip configurations of the grooves/teeth are suitable depending on design/logo on the workpiece surface (col. 4, lines 15-50). Moreover, there is only finite number of predictable options for the height of the protruding welding teeth: a) the height of the welding teeth gradually decreasing along a direction from the middle portion to two ends of the welding mark end surface, b) the height of the welding teeth gradually increasing along a direction from the middle portion to two ends of the welding mark end surface, or c) the height being substantially equal for all welding teeth. In any configuration, the objective is to provide sufficient contact with the workpiece with reduced energy loss at the head/workpiece interface and increasing the overall efficiency of ultrasonic welding (Popoola- col. 1, lines 15-22). The claim would have been obvious because a person of ordinary skill has good reason (reduced energy loss to improve transfer efficiency) to pursue the known options (teeth height options) within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) (see MPEP 2143- exemplary rationales).
As to claims 12 and 14, Popoola discloses plurality of welding teeth 42 with a truncated cone shape (fig. 2a), but is silent in terms of rows & columns and spherical shape. Nevertheless, Shi teaches that the welding head tip includes plurality of welding teeth 2 arranged in rows and columns on the welding mark end surface, wherein the welding teeth are of at least partially-spherical shape (figs. 1, 4). Accordingly, the claims are rendered obvious in the combination of Popoola & Shi set forth in claim 4 above.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/24/24 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVANG R PATEL whose telephone number is (571) 270-3636. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8am-5pm, EST.
To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/laws/interview-practice. Communications via Internet email are at the discretion of Applicant. If Applicant wishes to communicate via email, a written authorization form must be filed by Applicant: Form PTO/SB/439, available at www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The form may be filed via the Patent Center and can be found using the document description Internet Communications, see https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/forms. In limited circumstances, the Applicant may make an oral authorization for Internet communication. See MPEP § 502.03.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Walker can be reached on 571-272-3458. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Center. For more information, see https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. For questions, technical issues or troubleshooting, please contact the Patent Electronic Business Center at ebc@uspto.gov or 1-866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/DEVANG R PATEL/
Primary Examiner, AU 1735