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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 05/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues: “In the Office Action, the Examiner referred to the "balance detection module C2" (including an offset detection unit and a processor) ofHorng as the "first image-capturing unit" of claim 13, and asserted that paragraph [0045] of Horng, which mentions that "the delivery unit can move the impeller to the balance detection module ... and align the reference mark ... , " implies the camera is movable with respect to the rotor. That is, the Examiner combines the "camera of the balance detection module C2" in Horng with the "relative movement" generated by the delivery unit CS to satisfy the limitation of "the first image-capturing unit ... is movable along an axial direction" as recited in claim 13. However, the "relative movement" mentioned in Horng is not equivalent to the feature of "first image-capturing unit ... is movable along an axial direction" recited in amended claim 13.”
Examiner notes that Claim 13 is (a) not limited to an apparatus and (b)does not recite a more particular structure to make the first image capturing unit moveable. Hong provides a versatile mechanism for moving the camera into all the required positions and this reads sufficiently on the claimed method functionality.
Applicant argues: “Homg includes no teaching or suggestion of a camera that moves along an axial direction, nor does it teach focusing on and capturing images of two distinct terminal surfaces that are axially spaced apart.”
Examiner notes that translational movement as in Hong is a movement along an axial direction. It is not clear what distinction Applicant is trying to make in the claims.
Claim Construction
Note that, for purposes of compact prosecution, multiple reasons for rejection may be provided for a claim or a part of the claim. The rejection reasons are cumulative, and Applicant should review all the stated reasons as guides to improving the claim language and advancing the prosecution toward an allowance.
Note that “duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced” In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
"The manner or method in which such machine is to be utilized is not germane to the issue of patentability of the machine itself.” In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 580; 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967).
Material or article worked upon by an apparatus does not limit an apparatus claim. A claim is only limited by positively recited elements. Thus, "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935). See, MPEP 2115.
Claims 13, 15-17, 19--23 recite limitations: “a first image-capturing unit … a second image capturing unit … an offset angle calculation unit … a compensation calculation unit … a dynamic balance test processing unit … a storage unit electrically connected to the dynamic balance test processing unit … a first movement mechanism used to drive the first image-capturing unit” generic terms “unit” modified by functional language but not modified by structure or a structural term and not naming a structure readily recognized by persons of skill in the art to perform the claimed function. The limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, and shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Specification describes
“a first image-capturing unit … a second image capturing unit” as “a camera, a video camera or a monitor” in Paragraph 39;
“an offset angle calculation unit … a compensation calculation unit … a dynamic balance test processing unit … a storage unit electrically connected to the dynamic balance test processing unit” as instructions executed by a processor, in Paragraph 39;
“the storage unit 31 may be a hard drive” in Paragraph 39;
“a first movement mechanism used to drive the first image-capturing unit” as “a driver, a screw, a slide rail, or a mobile platform” in Paragraph 41.
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 13, 15-17, 19—23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170211591 to Horng (“Horng”) in view of YI-HAO CHUNG, YEN-LIN CHEN, “Three-Dimensional Image inpainting System Using 3D-ED-GAN for Efficient Vision-Based Detection for Rotor Dynamic Balance System,” IEEE systems, man and cybernetics society section, May 10, 2022 (“Chung”) which was provided in an IDS.
Regarding Claim 13: “A dynamic balance inspection method for performing dynamic balance inspection on a dynamic balancer with respect to a rotor of a motor, wherein the rotor comprises a positioning structure, a plurality of first counterweight portions located on a first side of the rotor, and a plurality of second counterweight portions located on a second side of the rotor, the dynamic balance inspection method comprising: (A preamble is generally not accorded any patentable weight where it merely recites the purpose of a process or the intended use of a structure, and where the body of the claim does not depend on the preamble for completeness but, instead, the process steps or structural limitations are able to stand alone. See In re Hirao, 535 F.2d 67, 190 USPQ 15 (CCPA 1976) and Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 152, 88 USPQ 478, 481 (CCPA 1951). See reasons for rejection directed to claim limitations below.)
capturing a first image of the positioning structure located on a first terminal surface and a second image of the first counterweight portions located on a second terminal surface by a first image-capturing unit, (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, the positioning structure can be a rotor/impeller and the counterweight portions can be located on this structure. Prior art teaches this: “The offset detection unit is an electronic element that can detect the magnitude of the movement of an object, such as … a camera.” Horng, Paragraph 64. “This permits the offset detection unit to detect the shaking magnitude of the impeller [positioning structure]. The shaking magnitude at least includes the information regarding the face run-out and the shaft run-out. Based on this, the processor is able to calculate the offset of the center of mass of the impeller. Then, the balance detection module C2 checks and outputs the offset of the center of mass of the impeller to the electrical control module Cl, so that the electrical control module Cl is able to calculate the weighting location [spaced counterweight portion] and the balancing weight that are required to adjust the impeller back to the proper position where the rotation of the impeller is balanced.” See Horng, Paragraph 64.)
wherein the first image-capturing unit is disposed on the first side of the rotor and is movable along an axial direction, and the first terminal surface and the second terminal surface are perpendicular to the axial direction and are spaced from each other in the axial direction; (Note that this element is directed to an apparatus intended to be used with the method, but does not limit the method to performing a particular step. Cumulatively, prior art teaches: “The balance detection module C2 may include devices such as a motor, an offset detection unit and a processor. … The offset detection unit is an electronic element that can detect the magnitude of the movement of an object, such as … a camera.” Horng, Paragraph 64. Also note that “the delivery unit can move the impeller to the balance detection module and the compensating module, and align the reference mark” which indicates that the camera is movable with respect to the rotor and can be aligned to take pictures in the claimed position. See Horng, Paragraph 45.)
capturing a third image of the second counterweight portions located on a third terminal surface by a second image-capturing unit, (“The balance detection module C2 may include devices such as a motor, an offset detection unit and a processor. … The offset detection unit is an electronic element that can detect the magnitude of the movement of an object, such as … a camera.” Horng, Paragraph 64. Also note that “the delivery unit can move the impeller to the balance detection module and the compensating module, and align the reference mark” which indicates that the camera is movable with respect to the rotor. See Horng, Paragraph 45. Here, duplication of cameras that take images is obvious. This is further confirmed in Chung using multiple sensors, such as “two 3D sensors to obtain 3D images of the left and right sides of a rotor,” in Chung, Fig. 3 and Page 60026, first column first paragraph and second column second paragraph, and statement of motivation below.)
wherein the second image-capturing unit is disposed on the second side of the rotor and is movable along the axial direction, and the third terminal surface is perpendicular to the axial direction and is separated apart from the first terminal surface and the second terminal surface in the axial direction; (Note that this element is directed to an apparatus intended to be used with the method, but does not limit the method to performing a particular step. Cumulatively, prior art teaches: “The balance detection module C2 may include devices such as a motor, an offset detection unit and a processor. … The offset detection unit is an electronic element that can detect the magnitude of the movement of an object, such as … a camera.” Horng, Paragraph 64. Also note that “the delivery unit can move the impeller to the balance detection module and the compensating module, and align the reference mark” which indicates that the camera is movable with respect to the rotor and can be aligned to take pictures in the claimed position. See Horng, Paragraph 45. See treatment of additional cameras above.)
obtaining, by an offset angle calculation unit, a first orientation corresponding to the positioning structure according to the first image, obtaining a second orientation corresponding to a first designated counterweight portion of the first counterweight portions according to the second image, … obtaining a first angular difference between the first orientation and the second orientation, (Horng teaches determining the rotor offset and calculating the weighting locations [second location, third location, …] relative to the rotor [first location] (in Paragraph 64), but does not discuss the offsets and locations as having coordinates or relative angles.
However, angles and coordinates are conventional geometric measures that establish locations. Chung explicitly teaches using angle and magnitude measures in the context of rotor balancing: “calculating the imbalance angle and magnitude to provide rotor balancing instructions to an operator.” Chung, Page 60025, column 2, first paragraph.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to supplement the teachings of Horng to designate relative locations using angles and magnitudes as taught in Chung, in order “to provide rotor balancing instructions to an operator.” Chung, Page 60025, column 2, first paragraph.)
obtaining a third orientation corresponding to a second designated counterweight portion of the second counterweight portions according to the third image, … and obtaining a second angular difference between the first orientation and the third orientation; (See obviousness of duplication of steps above. Cumulatively, Horng teaches “One having ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate that the impeller has multiple weighting locations and balancing weights that are required,” in Paragraph 66 and determining the rotor offset and calculating the weighting locations [second location, third location, …] relative to the rotor [first location] (in Paragraph 64), but does not discuss the offsets and locations as having coordinates or relative angles. Chung explicitly teaches using angle and magnitude measures in the context of rotor balancing: “calculating the imbalance angle and magnitude to provide rotor balancing instructions to an operator.” Chung, Page 60025, column 2, first paragraph. See statement of motivation above.)
receiving, by a dynamic balance test processing unit, a first compensation angle of the first side of the rotor and a first compensation mass corresponding to the first compensation angle from the dynamic balancer, wherein the first compensation angle is generated by using the positioning structure as a datum point of a dynamic balance polar coordinate system; (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, polar coordinates use angles and magnitude to indicate a location. As noted above: “calculating the imbalance angle and magnitude to provide rotor balancing instructions to an operator.” Chung, Page 60025, column 2, first paragraph and the statement of motivation above.)
receiving, by the dynamic balance test processing unit, a second compensation angle of the second side of the rotor and a second compensation mass corresponding to the second compensation angle from the dynamic balancer, wherein the second compensation angle is generated by using the positioning structure as the datum point of the dynamic balance polar coordinate system; (“the processor is able to calculate the offset of the center of mass of the impeller,” and thus to receive the output of the calculation for “multiple weighting locations and balancing weights.” See Horng, Paragraphs 64, 66. Note that the offset can be “angle and magnitude” as noted in Chung, Page 60025, column 2, first paragraph and the statement of motivation above.)
generating, by a compensation calculation unit, at least one first actual compensation position and at least one first actual compensation mass corresponding to the at least one first actual compensation position according to the first angular difference, the first compensation angle and the first compensation mass, .” (“Then, the balance detection module C2 checks and outputs the offset of the center of mass of the impeller to the electrical control module Cl, so that the electrical control module Cl is able to calculate the weighting location [compensation position] and the balancing weight [compensation mass] that are required to adjust the impeller back to the proper position where the rotation of the impeller is balanced.” See Horng, Paragraph 64.)
wherein the step of generating the at least one first actual compensation position and the at least one first actual compensation mass comprises: generating, by the compensation calculation unit, a first corrected compensation angle by correcting the first compensation angle according to the first angular difference; (“Based on this, the processor is able to calculate the offset of the center of mass of the impeller [angular difference]. Then, the balance detection module C2 checks and outputs the offset of the center of mass of the impeller to the electrical control module Cl, so that the electrical control module Cl is able to calculate the weighting location [coordinates] and the balancing weight [compensation. that are required to adjust the impeller back to the proper position where the rotation of the impeller is balanced.” Horng, Paragraph 64. See polar coordinates as angles and magnitudes above.)
locating, by the compensation calculation unit, at least one first target counterweight portion as the at least one first actual compensation position from the first counterweight portions according to the first corrected compensation angle; and
allocating, by the compensation calculation unit, the at least one first actual compensation mass to the at least one first actual compensation position according to the first compensation mass and the at least one first actual compensation position; (“the electrical control module Cl is able to calculate the weighting location [coordinates] and the balancing weight [compensation mass]. that are required to adjust the impeller back to the proper position where the rotation of the impeller is balanced.” Horng, Paragraph 64. See polar coordinates as angles and magnitudes in Claim 1.)
wherein the first corrected compensation angle is generated by using the first designated counterweight portion as a datum point of a first compensation polar coordinate system; and (As noted above, polar coordinates communicate angles and magnitude and prior art teaches “calculating the imbalance angle and magnitude to provide rotor balancing instructions to an operator.” Chung, Page 60025, column 2, first paragraph and the statement of motivation above.)
generating, by the compensation calculation unit, at least one second actual compensation position and at least one second actual compensation mass corresponding to the at least one second actual compensation position according to the second angular difference, the second compensation angle and the second compensation mass.” (“Then, the balance detection module C2 checks and outputs the offset of the center of mass of the impeller to the electrical control module Cl, so that the electrical control module Cl is able to calculate the weighting location [compensation position] and the balancing weight [compensation mass] that are required to adjust the impeller back to the proper position where the rotation of the impeller is balanced.” This process can be performed for “multiple weighting locations and balancing weights.” See Horng, Paragraphs 64, 66.)
Regarding Claim 15: “The dynamic balance inspection method according to claim 13, wherein in the step of locating the at least one first target counterweight portion as the at least one first actual compensation position, at least one portion closest to the first corrected compensation angle is selected as the at least one first target counterweight portion from the first counterweight portions.” (“the electrical control module Cl is able to calculate the weighting location [coordinates] and the balancing weight [compensation mass]. that are required to adjust the impeller back to the proper position where the rotation of the impeller is balanced.” Horng, Paragraph 64. In this case, the calculated weighting location is the closest location to the compensation weight coordinates. See polar coordinates as angles and magnitudes in Claim 1. Examiner suggests elaborating on this claim language.)
Regarding Claim 16: “The dynamic balance inspection method according to claim 13, wherein the at least one first actual compensation position is located, and the at least one first actual compensation mass is allocated to the at least one first actual compensation position by means of optimization.” (Note that this claim does not limit means of optimization to be any particular calculation. Prior art is directed to processing to “calculate the weighting location” with the required precision, and thus embodies a level of optimization by the means of processing. See Horng, Paragraph 64. Cumulatively note an example of “optimizing the detection parameters” in Chung, Page 60025, Abstract and the statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 17: “The dynamic balance inspection method according to claim 13, further comprising: displaying, by a display unit, a first compensation suggested image, wherein the first compensation suggested image is obtained by marking the at least one first actual compensation position and the at least one first actual compensation mass on a first side image of the first side corresponding to the rotor.” (“The electrical control module Cl can also output the information regarding the weighting location and the balancing weight to an external display” See Horng, Paragraph 63. “The electrical control module Cl can also output the information regarding the weighting location and the balancing weight to an external display” See Horng, Paragraph 63. Similarly see “provide rotor balancing instructions to an operator.” Chung, Page 60025, Column 2, first paragraph and statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 19: “The dynamic balance inspection method according to claim 13, wherein the first orientation is consistent with the datum point of the dynamic balance polar coordinate system.” (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, polar coordinates use angles and magnitude to indicate a location. As noted above: “calculating the imbalance angle and magnitude to provide rotor balancing instructions to an operator.” Chung, Page 60025, column 2, first paragraph and the statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 20: “The dynamic balance inspection method according to claim 13, further comprising:
storing a plurality of adjustment information corresponding to different rotors by a storage unit; and (“The electrical control module Cl can also output the information regarding the weighting location and the balancing weight to an external display or a storage unit.” Horng, Paragraph 63.)
adjusting, by the dynamic balance test processing unit, at least one of span and level of a supporting structure of the dynamic balancer and height of a carrier carrying the rotor according to the plurality of adjustment information of the rotor.” (“When the impeller is moved to the balance detection module C2, the motor will drive the impeller …” indicating an adjustment of a level and/or height of a carrier carrying the rotor structure with respect to the detection module. See Horng, Paragraphs 64, 67.)
Regarding Claim 21: “The dynamic balance inspection method according to claim 20, further comprising:
enabling selecting, by a processor movement control portion, an adjustment item corresponding to the rotor from the plurality of adjustment information stored in the storage unit, (“When the impeller is moved to the balance detection module C2, the motor will drive the impeller …” indicating an adjustment of a level and/or height of a carrier carrying the rotor structure with respect to the detection module. See Horng, Paragraphs 64, 67.)
the adjustment item comprising a first shooting position of the first image-capturing unit focusing on the first terminal surface and a second shooting position of the first image-capturing unit focusing on the second terminal surface; and a first movement mechanism to adjust shooting position at which the first image capturing unit captures the first image and the second image according to the plurality of adjustment information of the rotor controlling a first movement mechanism by the processor to move the first image-capturing unit to the first shooting position and the second shooting position along the axial direction.” (“The balance detection module C2 may include devices such as a motor [movement control portion electrically connected to], an offset detection unit and a processor,” which is electrically connected to at least one storage unit. See Horng, Paragraphs 63, 64.)
Regarding Claim 22: “The dynamic balance inspection method according to claim 13, wherein before the first angular difference is calculated, the method further comprises: calculating, by an offset position calculation unit, an inner circle diameter and a center position of the shaft of the rotor according to the first image and calculating an outer circle diameter and a center position of the body of the rotor according to the second image to determine whether the shaft and the body are located at a normal position.” .” (Note that an impeller is characterized by having an outer circle diameter, an inner circle diameter 2 and a center position designated by the shaft 1 as noted in Horng, Fig. 3 and Chung Fig. 11. “The rotor shaft center, radius, KP center position, balance fin, and BS position were detected using the 3D depth data and 2D amplitude data of the rotor, as displayed in Fig. 11 . By using the detected information and the imbalance vector provided by the balancing machine, we computed the optimized balance configuration, as shown in Fig. 12,” thus determining substantively similar (radius/diameter) measurements of the rotor and shaft and determining if there is imbalance with respect to a normal position. Chung, page 60030, left column, last paragraph. See statement of motivation in Claim 1. Note that while Chung does not explicitly state which image data is used to calculate which parameter, Chung does indicate that multiple image data and multiple cameras can be used to obtain the data needed for these calculations, which reads on the claim.)
Regarding Claim 23: “The dynamic balance inspection method according to claim 21, further comprising:
selecting, by the processor, the adjustment item from the plurality of adjustment information, the adjustment item comprising a third shooting position of the second image capturing unit focusing on the third terminal surface; and (“When the impeller is moved to the balance detection module C2, the motor will drive the impeller …” indicating an adjustment of a level and/or height of a carrier carrying the rotor structure with respect to the detection module. See Horng, Paragraphs 64, 67.)
controlling a second movement mechanism by the processor to move the second image capturing unit to the third shooting position along the axial direction.” (“When the impeller is moved to the balance detection module C2, the motor will drive the impeller …” indicating an adjustment of a level and/or height of a carrier carrying the rotor structure with respect to the detection module. See Horng, Paragraphs 64, 67.)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIKHAIL ITSKOVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-7940. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thu. 9am - 8pm.
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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at (571)272-7383. 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.
/MIKHAIL ITSKOVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights