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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6, 10, 16, 17, 19 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.
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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Note that this claim is directed towards "a computer program medium”. Please note that under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims when read in light of the specification, the recited “computer program medium” can be a carrier wave or other non-statutory transmission embodiments.
It can be noted that the specification of the Instant Application does not define a computer program medium as a "non-transitory” computer program medium, and the claim language does not clearly exclude “non-statutory” transmission embodiments. Applicant is suggested to add “non-transitory” in the claim.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Baldini US 2010/0165098 (hereinafter Baldini).
Regarding claim 1, Baldini teaches: a method for positioning a movable head, wherein the movable head is configured to emit a laser ([0028] - - low power laser), wherein the method comprises:
displaying a marking point on a target interface in response to a request for obtaining position information of the movable head, wherein the marking point characterizes a coordinate position of the movable head mapped to the target interface ([0028] - - providing a pointer using low power laser; the pointer is a marking point; the master part surface is a target interface; [0025] - - the pointer is representative for a current position of the first body which is the laser head); and
making the marking point displace on the target interface correspondingly when the movable head is displaced, to make the marking point fall on a machining element input on the target interface (Fig. 2, [0032] - - move the pointer from an unaligned starting position to an aligned position with respect the reference marker).
Claim 11 is substantially similar to claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons and rationale as above.
Regarding claim 3, Baldini teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Baldini further teaches:
determining at least one machining position contained in the machining element in response to the machining element input by a user on the target interface ([0032] - - reference mark is a machining position); and
aligning one of the at least one machining position with the marking point, to make the marking point fall on the machining element input on the target interface (Fig. 2, [0032] - - move the pointer from an unaligned starting position to an aligned position with respect the reference marker).
Regarding claim 4, Baldini teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Baldini further teaches: determining a position of the movable head in a machining plane of a computer numerical control machine based on light spots emitted by the movable head ([0028] - - providing a pointer using low power laser; [0025] - - the pointer is representative for a current position of the first body which is the laser head; ).
Regarding claim 9, Baldini teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Baldini further teaches: a first coordinate system is pre-established in the machining plane of the computer numerical control machine, and wherein the position information of the movable head comprises horizontal and vertical coordinates of the light spot emitted by the movable head under the first coordinate system (Fig. 1, [0032], [0033] - - positioning unit POS move the laser head in X,Y, Z direction, this is a first coordinate system).
Regarding claim 12, Baldini teaches: a computer numerical control machine, comprising:
a slide rail ([0029] - - moving the laser head in X,Y, Z direction, thus there is a rail for moving);
a movable head, slidably provided on the slide rail ([0029] - - moving the laser head in X,Y, Z direction);
a communication component, for receiving a marking point obtained by a method for positioning the movable head ([0030] - - PLC receives camera image; [0017] - - receiving a camera image having a reference marker); and
a controller, for controlling a movement of the movable head on the slide rail to machine a surface of machining material based on the marking point (Fig. 4 – control system; [0027] - - high power laser beam for welding);
wherein the method for positioning the movable head comprises:
displaying the marking point on a target interface in response to a request for obtaining position information of the movable head, the marking point characterizes a coordinate position of the movable head mapped to the target interface ([0028] - - providing a pointer using low power laser; the pointer is a marking point; [0025] - - the pointer is representative for a current position of the first body which is the laser head); and
making the marking point displace on the target interface correspondingly when the movable head is displaced, to make the marking point fall on a machining element input on the target interface (Fig. 2, [0032] - - move the pointer from an unaligned starting position to an aligned position with respect the reference marker).
Regarding claim 14, Baldini teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Baldini further teaches:
determining at least one machining position contained in the machining element in response to the machining element input by a user on the target interface ([0032] - - reference mark is a machining position); and
aligning one of the at least one machining position with the marking point, to make the marking point fall on the machining element input on the target interface (Fig. 2, [0032] - - move the pointer from an unaligned starting position to an aligned position with respect the reference marker).
Regarding claim 15, Baldini teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Baldini further teaches: determining a position of the movable head in a machining plane of a computer numerical control machine based on light spots emitted by the movable head ([0028] - - providing a pointer using low power laser; [0025] - - the pointer is representative for a current position of the first body which is the laser head).
Regarding claim 18, Baldini teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Baldini further teaches: a first coordinate system is pre-established in the machining plane of the computer numerical control machine, and wherein the position information of the movable head comprises horizontal and vertical coordinates of the light spot emitted by the movable head under the first coordinate system (Fig. 1, [0032], [0033] - - positioning unit POS move the laser head in X,Y, Z direction, this is a first coordinate system).
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.
Claims 2 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baldini US 2010/0165098 (hereinafter Baldini) in view of Chan et al. US 2023/0130740 (hereinafter Chan).
Regarding claim 2, Baldini teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
But Baldini does not explicitly teach:
obtaining an offset parameter of the movable head; and
adjusting the position information of the movable head based on the offset parameter to determine a display the marking point on the target interface.
However, Chan teaches:
obtaining an offset parameter of the movable head ([0054] - - the controller calculates an XY-offset); and
adjusting the position information of the movable head based on the offset parameter to determine a display the marking point on the target interface ([0055] - - compensate the offset by adjust laser head position).
Baldini and Chan are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They all relate to laser system.
Therefore before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above method, as taught by Baldini, and incorporating obtaining offset, as taught by Chan.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to improve calibrating a laser machine, as suggested by Chan ([0003]).
Regarding claim 13, Baldini teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
But Baldini does not explicitly teach:
obtaining an offset parameter of the movable head; and
adjusting the position information of the movable head based on the offset parameter to determine a display the marking point on the target interface.
However, Chan teaches:
obtaining an offset parameter of the movable head ([0054] - - the controller calculates an XY-offset); and
adjusting the position information of the movable head based on the offset parameter to determine a display the marking point on the target interface ([0055] - - compensate the offset by adjust laser head position).
Baldini and Chan are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They all relate to laser system.
Therefore before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above machine, as taught by Baldini, and incorporating obtaining offset, as taught by Chan.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to improve calibrating a laser machine, as suggested by Chan ([0003]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baldini US 2010/0165098 (hereinafter Baldini) in view of Mochida US 2018/0290246 (hereinafter Mochida).
Regarding claim 7, Baldini teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
But Baldini does not explicitly teach:
making the marking point displace on the target interface correspondingly at preset time intervals when the movable head is displaced.
However, Mochida teaches:
making the marking point displace on the target interface correspondingly at preset time intervals when the movable head is displaced. ([0006] - - acquire position information in a predefined control cycle, then display the route; the predefined control cycle is a preset time interval).
Baldini and Mochida are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They all relate to laser system.
Therefore before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above method, as taught by Baldini, and incorporating marking at preset time intervals, as taught by Mochida.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to improve user interface for displaying machining route and laser output, as suggested by Mochida ([0005]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baldini US 2010/0165098 (hereinafter Baldini) in view of TOYAMA et al. US 2018/0029159 (hereinafter TOYAMA).
Regarding claim 8, Baldini teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
But Baldini does not explicitly teach:
a switch button is provided on a target page, the request for obtaining the position information of the movable head is issued when the switch button is clicked.
However, TOYAMA teaches:
a switch button is provided on a target page, the request for obtaining the position information of the movable head is issued when the switch button is clicked ([0043] - - operator press a start button on the operating panel, operator press a continue icon; the position of the laser head is obtained in each movement step thus the result can be displayed).
Baldini and TOYAMA are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They all relate to laser system.
Therefore before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above method, as taught by Baldini, and incorporating a button, as taught by TOYAMA.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to adjust laser alignment easily, as suggested by TOYAMA ([0007]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baldini US 2010/0165098 (hereinafter Baldini) in view of Denney et al. US 2004/0182841 (hereinafter Denney).
Regarding claim 20, Baldini teaches: a machining system, comprising:
a computer numerical control machine, comprising a communication component, a controller (Fig. 1, Fig.4),
a machining control device in communication with the computer numerical control machine (Fig. 1,Fig. 4); wherein the machining control device is configured to execute a method for positioning the movable head, wherein the movable head is configured to emit a laser (Fig. 1; [0027] - - laser head; [0028] - - low power laser),
wherein the method comprises:
displaying a marking point on a target interface in response to a request for obtaining position information of the movable head; wherein the marking point characterizes a coordinate position of the movable head mapped to the target interface ([0028] - - providing a pointer using low power laser; the pointer is a marking point; the master part surface is a target interface; [0025] - - the pointer is representative for a current position of the first body which is the laser head); and
making the marking point displace on the target interface correspondingly when the movable head is displaced, to make the marking point fall on a machining element input on the target interface (Fig. 2, [0032] - - move the pointer from an unaligned starting position to an aligned position with respect the reference marker).
But Baldini does not explicitly teach:
a slide rail and a movable head, wherein the movable head is slidably provided on the slide rail.
However, Denney teaches:
a slide rail and a movable head, wherein the movable head is slidably provided on the slide rail (Figs 6A and 6B, claim 8 - - the laser head is slidably coupled to the second rail).
Baldini and Denney are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They all relate to laser system.
Therefore before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above method, as taught by Baldini, and incorporating a slide rail, as taught by Denney.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to accurately and repeatedly position the laser head, as suggested by Denney ([0095]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUHUI R PAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9872. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-5PM EST.
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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at (571) 272-9774. 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.
/YUHUI R PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
