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
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-8 & 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lotz et al (PGPub 2016/0306133) (Lotz) in view of Wiegmann et al (PGPub 2017/0348814) (Wiegmann).
Regarding Claims 1 & 16, Lotz discloses a measuring machine (Fig. 1), which is set up for measuring a workpiece (Paragraphs 3 & 8), in particular a form and/or a contour on a workpiece, featuring comprising:
a workpiece carrier for supporting the workpiece (20);
a rotating drive (21) for rotating the workpiece carrier around an axis of rotation (Paragraph 35);
an optical sensor (27) configured to record measuring data on a contour of the workpiece;
a sensor positioning device (30, 31, & 32, See figs. 1 & 2) configured to position the optical sensor (27) parallel to the axis of rotation in at least one measuring position (See fig. 1);
Lotz fails to explicitly disclose a position correction system (17) configured to tilt and/or translationally move the workpiece carrier (13) relative to the axis of rotation (D);and a control unit (30) configured to control the rotating drive (22), the optical sensor (23) and the sensor positioning device (26) such that during rotation of the workpiece (11) around the axis of rotation (D), the measuring data (M) is recorded by the optical sensor (23) in the at least one measuring position (P), wherein the measuring data (M) describes an offset (s) and/or an inclination (a) of a longitudinal axis (L) of the workpiece relative to the axis of rotation (D) and wherein the control unit (30) is configured to control the position correction system (17) during rotation of the workpiece (11) around the axis of rotation (D) such that the offset (s) and/or the inclination (a) fulfill(s) a predetermined positioning condition;
However, Wiegmann teaches a measurement machine and method for adjusting the attitude of a rotationally symmetric workpiece, comprising:
a position correction system (24) configured to tilt and/or translationally move the workpiece carrier (23) relative to the axis of rotation (Paragraphs 46 & 48); and
a control unit (21) configured to control the rotating drive (22), the optical sensor (20, Paragraph 44) and the sensor positioning device (19) such that during rotation of the workpiece around the axis of rotation (C), the measuring data is recorded by the optical sensor (20) in the at least one measuring position (Paragraphs 56 & 57), wherein the measuring data describes an offset (s) and/or an inclination (a) of a longitudinal axis of the workpiece relative to the axis of rotation (Paragraph 60-63) and wherein the control unit is configured to control the position correction system during rotation of the workpiece around the axis of rotation such that the offset (s) and/or the inclination (a) fulfill(s) a predetermined positioning condition (Paragraph 64);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lotz with a position correction system (17) configured to tilt and/or translationally move the workpiece carrier (13) relative to the axis of rotation (D);and a control unit (30) configured to control the rotating drive (22), the optical sensor (23) and the sensor positioning device (26) such that during rotation of the workpiece (11) around the axis of rotation (D), the measuring data (M) is recorded by the optical sensor (23) in the at least one measuring position (P), wherein the measuring data (M) describes an offset (s) and/or an inclination (a) of a longitudinal axis (L) of the workpiece relative to the axis of rotation (D) and wherein the control unit (30) is configured to control the position correction system (17) during rotation of the workpiece (11) around the axis of rotation (D) such that the offset (s) and/or the inclination (a) fulfill(s) a predetermined positioning condition because this method ensures accurate positioning of the test object which improves the measurement of the contour of the object.
The method of claim 16 is also met by the disclosure.
Regarding Claim 2, Lotz as modified by Wiegmann discloses the aforementioned. Further, Lotz discloses wherein the optical sensor (27) is a camera (Paragraph 37).
Regarding Claim 3, Lotz as modified by Wiegmann discloses the aforementioned. Further, Lotz discloses wherein the camera (27) is a line scanning or matrix camera (Paragraph 37).
Regarding Claim 4, Lotz as modified by Wiegmann discloses the aforementioned. Further, Lotz discloses wherein the camera (27) is set up configured to record at least one image of a contour of at least one section of the workpiece as the measuring data (Paragraphs 3, 6, & 32).
Regarding Claim 5, Lotz as modified by Wiegmann discloses the aforementioned but fails to explicitly disclose a buffer memory which is communicatively connected to the optical sensor and the control unit and which is configured to temporarily store the measuring data provided by the optical sensor;
However, the examiner takes official notice this would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lotz as modified by Wiegmann with a buffer memory which is communicatively connected to the optical sensor and the control unit and which is configured to temporarily store the measuring data provided by the optical sensor because buffer memory is typically used when a device is reading out data to a computer for storage and allows for faster readout times of the device than the write times of the computer for storage purposes thus preventing loss of data.
Regarding Claim 6, Lotz as modified by Wiegmann discloses the aforementioned. Further, Wiegmann discloses wherein the control unit is configured to cause the optical sensor to record and provide the measuring data, and wherein the control unit is further configured to compare the provided measuring data with reference data to determine whether the predetermined positioning condition is fulfilled (Paragraph 63);
The reasons for combination remain the same as above.
Regarding Claim 7, Lotz as modified by Wiegmann discloses the aforementioned. Further, Lotz discloses wherein the control unit is configured set up to cause the optical sensor to record and provide measuring data at a single measuring position. The camera of Lotz is capable of this function (Paragraph 5) and when it takes measurements it will be performing this function as dictated by a control unit.
Regarding Claim 8, Lotz as modified by Wiegmann discloses the aforementioned. Further, Wiegmann discloses wherein the control unit is configured set up to cause the optical sensor to record and provide measuring data at at least two different measuring positions (Paragraphs 56 & 57).
The reasons for combination remain the same as above.
Regarding Claim 13, Lotz as modified by Wiegmann discloses the aforementioned but fails to explicitly disclose wherein a communication connection between the control unit and the position correction system is wireless and/or wherein a power supply connection to the position correction system is wireless;
However, the examiner takes official notice this would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lotz as modified by Wiegmann with wherein a communication connection between the control unit and the position correction system is wireless and/or wherein a power supply connection to the position correction system is wireless because wireless communication between devices allows for remote operation of a device from a user’s computer and offers such advantages as convenience and easy updating of the operating software.
Regarding Claim 14, Lotz as modified by Wiegmann discloses the aforementioned. Further, Wiegmann discloses wherein a reference plane (Xm,Ym) is defined a position known relative to the machine's axis of rotation, in particular at right angles orthogonal to the machine's axis of rotation, wherein the offset (s) and/or the inclination (a) are determined in this the reference plane (Paragraphs 51 & 52, Figs. 1 & 2).
The reasons for combination remain the same as above.
Regarding Claim 15, Lotz as modified by Wiegmann discloses the aforementioned. Further, Wiegmann discloses wherein the reference plane (Xm, Ym) is defined outside an area in which the workpiece is positioned in the measuring machine is located (see fig. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to Claim 9 the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious compare the measuring data recorded and provided at the first measuring position with first reference data to determine whether a first positioning condition is fulfilled and compare the measuring data recorded and provided at the second measuring position with second reference data to determine whether a second positioning condition is fulfilled, in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claim.
Claim 10-12 are allowable based upon their dependency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHON COOK whose telephone number is (571)270-1323. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-7pm.
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, Kara Geisel can be reached at 571-272-2416. 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.
/JONATHON COOK/Examiner, Art Unit 2877 March 27, 2026
/Kara E. Geisel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877