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 § 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 1-19 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.
Claim 1 recites in line 15 “a set driving control signal”. However, it is unclear what exactly is this “set” driving control signal. Further clarification is needed.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 10-2021-0157159 (hereafter—KR’159) in view of Kimura US 2020/0139447.
In regards to claim 1, KR’159 discloses a device (100) for machining a hydrogen tank (10), the device (100) being configured to cut a welding bead disposed at a liner of the hydrogen tank (see Figures 5b, 6a-6b, 14-15), the device comprising: a jig frame (130); a liner mount (refer to liner mount portion on Figure 4 of KR’159, in the same way applicant’s mount 20 is presented) disposed at the jig frame (130) and configured to rotatably support the liner and to apply a rotational force to the liner; a liner outer support (200) disposed at the jig frame (130) and configured to support an outer circumferential surface of the liner (see Figure 4); a bead cutter (430) disposed at the jig frame (130) and configured to move forward and backward along the liner and to cut the welding bead (see Figure 11); a cutter driver (420) configured to move the bead cutter forward and backward along the liner (see Figure 11).
However, KR’159 fails to disclose that the device comprises a reaction force detection sensor coupled to the bead cutter and configured to detect a reaction force applied to the bead cutter; and a controller configured to control a forward-backward movement distance of the bead cutter based on applying, the cutter driver, a set driving control signal according to a detection signal of the reaction force detection sensor.
Nevertheless, Kimura teaches that it is well known in the art to have a reaction force detection sensor coupled to a bead cutter (400) and configured to detect a reaction force applied to the bead cutter (paragraph [0088]); and a controller (500) configured to control a forward-backward movement distance of the bead cutter based on applying (paragraphs [0088-0089]), the cutter driver, a set driving control signal according to a detection signal of the reaction force detection sensor (paragraph [0073-075; 0084]. With this load control, it is possible to restrain large changes in a distance between an outer peripheral surface 11a of the liner a and a cutting tool 441, and it is thus possible to continuously cut the weld bead FB well by using the cutting tool 441, the weld bead FB extending along the outer peripheral surface 11a of the liner 11. As a result, it becomes possible to reliably restrain generation of the situation where the cutting tool 441 does not reach the weld bead FB and thus the weld bead FB cannot be cut completely, as well as generation of the situation where the cutting tool 44 reaches the outer peripheral surface 11a of the liner 11 and the liner 11 becomes partially thin (paragraph [0088]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time Applicant’s invention was filed, to modify KR’159 to include a reaction force detection sensor coupled to the bead cutter and a controller as taught by Kimura to reliably restrain generation of the situation where the cutting tool does not reach the weld bead and thus the weld bead cannot be cut completely, as well as generation of the situation where the cutting tool reaches the outer peripheral surface of the liner and the liner becomes partially thin.
In regards to claim 18, KR’159 as modified discloses the device of claim 1, KR’159 as modified discloses that the cutter driver comprises a motor (420 tool driving motor).
In regards to claim 19, KR’159 as modified discloses the device of claim 1, KR’159 as modified discloses that the cutter driver comprises a linear motor (420 tool driving motor).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE N RAMOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5134. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 7:00 am -5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, 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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/NICOLE N RAMOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722
