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 § 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.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) limitations that fall under the grouping or organized human activity (mental steps) as it pertains to record keeping of data. Re claims 1 and 4, the limitations of a reader and electronic device are generic computer components performing routine gathering steps. Reading, decoding, generating, and storing are mental steps that are being performing by generic computer components being applied to a particular environment, such as for tool tracking/ logging/ record keeping and are similar to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The dependent claims merely specify further details of the abstract concepts, wherein second data is merely repeating the abstract concepts and applying it to additional elements. Storing of data is mental steps that are being performed with generic computer components, wherein details of specific types of data being stored, generated, or determined do not provide a practical application as they fall under mental concepts. Displaying is insignificant post solution activity (claim 9). Generic computer components being applied to a data management environment to store, generate, display, analyze, etc. cannot integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Appropriate correction is requested
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.
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, 3, 4, and 6-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien et al. (US 20180039807) in view of Takuya (JP2004351555).
Re claim 1, O’Brien et al. teaches a system (10) for increasing traceability of at least a first cutting edge of a cutting tool, the system comprising:
a reader device (25) for reading a machine readable code (12);
an electronic device (30) configured to be connected with the reader device (25), the electronic device (30) having at least one processing circuitry (30 implicit) configured to cause the system (10) to:
detect, by the reader device (25), at least a first identification marker (12) on the cutting tool (15) wherein the at least first identification marker (12) is a machine readable code;
read, by the reader device (25) , the at least first identification marker (12);
decode the at least first identification marker (12) to determine at least a first cutting edge information data comprised in the machine readable code of the at least first identification marker (12);
store at least any of the at least first cutting tool identification data and the at least first cutting edge information data in a memory (see paragraph [0034]-[0045] and FIG. 1-3).
O’Brien et al. is silent to the first cutting edge information being a unique identity and generating/ determining the first cutting edge information data.
Takuya teaches such limitations (paragraph [0030]+).
Prior to the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings to increase the traceability by using unique data.
Re claim 3, the prior art teaches a tool with a cutting edge mounted in a tool holder, as how the tool operates (see FIGURES).
Re claim 4, the limitations have been discussed above, re claim 1.
Re claims 6-9, the O’Brien et al. teaches storing operation data associated with the cutting tool in a memory (FIG. 4A+ and paragraph [0044]+ which teaches storing types of data related to that scanned in/ registered to the system. Therefore, given such logging of tool information related to the scans, it would have been well within the ordinary skill in the art to generate/ record/ display necessary data of the tool as it pertains to tool usage/ operation, as a way to log and keep track of the tool usage, projects, replacement, etc.
Re claim 10, processing circuitry (processor) has been discussed above.
Re claim 11, the limitations have been discussed above.
Claim(s) 2 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien et al./ Takuya, as discussed above in view of Singer (US 20200356077).
The teachings of O’Brien et al./ Takuya have been discussed above but are silent to first and second identification markers (edge information data) being used to generate first cutting tool identification data.
Singer teaches the use of first and second identification markers (edges) (FIG. 1A+), interpreted as used to generate first cutting tool identification data.
Prior to the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings in order to track the different performing surfaces/ edges.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
PNG
media_image1.png
158
656
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL I WALSH whose telephone number is (571)272-2409. The examiner can normally be reached 8am - 5pm.
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, Steven Paik can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/DANIEL I. WALSH/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights