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 Interpretation
Claims 1, 10, 11, and 19 recite “configured to…” language without specifically stating structural limitations to achieve the function, rather only a desired function of the structural element. The Examiner would like to remind the Applicant that the functional limitation may already be inherent, see MPEP 2114(I).
Claim 5 and 20 recites “the second pivot moves the roll pad… and the tip are symmetrical”. The second pivot has no structural connection to the tip. As such, this limitation is interpreted as a functional limitation of operating the device, see MPEP 2114(II).
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.
Claim 4 and 9 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 4, depends from claim 2, and recites “a start point of the score line” and “an ending point of the score line” which are both introduced in claim 2. Secondly, the roll pad contacts with the second surface which is not the same point as that of claim 2. The defined points in claim 4 are thus indefinite.
Claim 9 recites “the supporter is in a surface-contact with the glass ribbon”. This is improper grammar that makes the claim indefinite. The Examiner interprets the limitation as “the supporter contacts the glass ribbon”.
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.
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.
Claim 1-9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavallaro et al (WO-2017040128-A1) and further in view of Markham et al (US-20130047674-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Cavallaro teaches a scoring apparatus for scoring a glass ribbon [0065] moving in a vertical direction (Fig. 2), the scoring apparatus comprising a first rail with is spaced apart from and faces a first surface of the glass ribbon and crosses the glass ribbon in a direction inclined with respect to the vertical direction [0066] (Fig. 2, stationary track 171b); a scoring wheel reciprocating along the first rail (Fig. 10, score device 169b, score element 312); a second rail that is spaced apart from a second surface of the glass ribbon (Fig. 2, stationary track 171a); a support wheel reciprocating along the second rail [0082] (Fig. 6, support device 169a, support wheel 629). Cavallaro teaches the scoring wheel comprises a first pivot [0083] (Fig. 8, drive gear 809) and a tip (score element 312 or landing point 801), the support wheel comprises a second pivot (Fig. 6, drive gear 627) and a roll pad [0082] (wheel 629 and flat outer surface 633).
Cavallaro does not expressly teach further structure below the two rails (Fig. 1). In related glass scoring apparatus art [0030], Markham teaches of a supporter (Fig. 3, engaging device 86) [0036] located below the second rail (Fig. 6B; Fig. 3, backing bar 52) configured to reciprocate in the vertical direction [0046] (Fig. 3, linear drive unit 94; Fig. 6A/6B). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a supporter downstream from the first/second rail that reciprocates in the vertical direction as means to stabilize the glass ribbon during continuous movement and processing [0036].
Regarding claim 2-3, depending from claim 1, Cavallaro teaches the scoring wheel moves along the first rail [0083], the first pivot moves the tip to come into contact with the first surface of the glass ribbon and moves the tip [0083]. The start point and ending point of the score line are illustrated by Fig. 10 and 11 of Cavallaro which pertains to the manner of operating the apparatus which does not differentiate from the prior art, see MPEP 2114(II).
Regarding claim 4, depending from claim 2, Cavallaro teaches the support wheel moves along the second rail [0082], the second pivot moves the roll pad to come into contact with the second surface of the glass ribbon [0082]. The roll pad separates from the second surface of the glass ribbon (Fig. 12-13) which pertains to the manner of operating the apparatus which does not differentiate from the prior art, see MPEP 2114(II).
Regarding claim 5, depending from claim 4, Cavallaro illustrates the support wheel to be symmetrical with the scoring wheel (Fig. 6-14, dashed axis between 312 and center of 629) [0065] (“substantially move together”), and the second pivot moves the roll pad symmetrically with the first pivot and the tip (Fig. 6-14). Cavallaro has all the structural limitations to accomplish the instantly claimed operation, the manner of operating the device does not differentiate the apparatus claim from the prior art, see MPEP 2114(II).
Regarding claim 6, depending from claim 1, modified Cavallaro relies on the supporter of Markham which has reciprocating movement [0046] separate from the movement of the scoring wheel and support wheel (TAM 50).
Regarding claim 7, depending from claim 1, modified Cavallaro relies on the supporter of Markham which the supporter located to face the second surface of the glass ribbon (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, depending from claim 1, modified Cavallaro relies on the supporter of Markham which the supporter (engaging device 86) comes into contact with the glass ribbon above and under the score line [0047-48] (Fig. 6B).
Regarding claim 9, depending from claim 1, modified Cavallaro relies on the supporter of Markham which contacts the glass ribbon (Fig. 6B).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavallaro et al (WO-2017040128-A1) and Markham et al (US-20130047674-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Herve et al (US-20080264994-A1).
Regarding claim 10, depending from claim 1, Cavallaro teaches of two embodiments wherein the two rails are horizontal or angled relative to the ribbon travel direction [0065-66]. Cavallaro does not expressly teach of an angle adjuster between the two embodiments. In the same field of endeavor, Herve teaches of an actuator that changes the angle of the rail of a scoring apparatus [0024]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add an angle adjuster actuator that adjusts the inclination of the angle of either the first rail and the second rail of a scoring apparatus for additional control of the parameters of the scoring apparatus [0018, 24].
Claim 11-12 and 14-20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavallaro et al (WO-2017040128-A1) and further in view of Markham et al (US-20130047674-A1) and McCreary et al (WO-2014209833-A1).
Regarding claim 11+17 and 19, Cavallaro teaches a scoring apparatus for scoring a glass ribbon [0065] moving in a vertical direction (Fig. 2), the scoring apparatus comprising a first rail with is spaced apart from and faces a first surface of the glass ribbon and crosses the glass ribbon in a direction inclined with respect to the vertical direction [0066] (Fig. 2, stationary track 171b); a scoring wheel reciprocating along the first rail (Fig. 10, score device 169b, score element 312); a second rail that is spaced apart from a second surface of the glass ribbon (Fig. 2, stationary track 171a); a support wheel reciprocating along the second rail [0082] (Fig. 6, support device 169a, support wheel 629). Cavallaro teaches the scoring wheel comprises a first pivot [0083] (Fig. 8, drive gear 809) and a tip (score element 312 or landing point 801), the support wheel comprises a second pivot (Fig. 6, drive gear 627) and a roll pad [0082] (wheel 629 and flat outer surface 633).
Cavallaro does not expressly teach further structure below the two rails (Fig. 1). In related glass scoring apparatus art [0030], Markham teaches of a supporter (Fig. 3, engaging device 86) [0036] located below the second rail (Fig. 6B; Fig. 3, backing bar 52) configured to reciprocate in the vertical direction [0046] (Fig. 3, linear drive unit 94; Fig. 6A/6B) and a bender located below the first rail [0031] (Fig. 6D) wherein the bender bends the glass ribbon in a direction perpendicular to the vertical direction at a position lower than the score line[0031] (Fig. 6D). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a supporter downstream from the first/second rail of Cavallaro that reciprocates in the vertical direction as means to stabilize the glass ribbon during continuous movement and processing [0036].
Markham does not expressly teach the bender reciprocates in the vertical direction. In the same field of endeavor, McCreary teaches their bending robot reciprocates in the vertical direction [0036]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the bender of modified Cavallaro to reciprocate in the vertical direction as means to match the velocity of the moving glass ribbon [0036].
Regarding claim 12, depending from claim 11, modified Cavallaro relies on the bender of Markham which absorbs to the first surface of the glass ribbon [0033] (Fig. 6C).
Regarding claim 14, depending from claim 11, modified Cavallaro relies on the bender of McCreary that matches the velocity in the vertical direction that is equal to a velocity of the glass ribbon [0036]. This limitation is a manner of operating the device, which does not differentiate the apparatus from the prior art, see MPEP 2114(II).
Regarding claim 15, depending from claim 11, modified Cavallaro relies on the supporter of Markham which the supporter (engaging device 86) comes into contact with the glass ribbon above and under the score line [0047-48] (Fig. 6B).
Regarding claim 16, depending from claim 11, Cavallaro teaches of using laser on the score line to induce thermal stress to separate the glass [0111]. Cavallaro does not teach the scoring wheel is a laser device. In the same field of endeavor, McCreary teaches the scoring wheel can optionally comprise a laser device [0041]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the scoring wheel of Cavallaro be modified to comprise a laser device as known alternative means to score the glass ribbon.
Regarding claim 18, depending from claim 11, modified Cavallaro relies on the supporter and bender of Markham which are spaced apart with the glass ribbon interposed therebetween (Fig. 6B).
Regarding claim 20, depending from claim 19, Cavallaro teaches the scoring wheel moves along the first rail [0083], the first pivot moves the tip to come into contact with the first surface of the glass ribbon and moves the tip [0083]; the support wheel moves along the second rail [0082], the second pivot moves the roll pad to come into contact with the second surface of the glass ribbon [0082]. The start point and ending point of the score line are illustrated by Fig. 10 and 11 of Cavallaro and the roll pad separates from the second surface of the glass ribbon (Fig. 12-13) which pertains to the manner of operating the apparatus which does not differentiate from the prior art, see MPEP 2114(II).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavallaro et al (WO-2017040128-A1), Markham et al (US-20130047674-A1), and McCreary et al (WO-2014209833-A1) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Andrewlavage (US-6616025-B1).
Regarding claim 13, depending from claim 12, modified Cavallaro relies on the bender of Markham which scribes the glass ribbon (Fig. 3) on the surface in a direction toward the same surface (Fig. 6D). Markham does not expressly teach the bender bends in a direction toward the opposite surface. In the same field of endeavor, Andrewlavage teaches of a first rail/scoring wheel (Fig. 4, scribe 25) and a bender (transporter 29) that bends in a direction toward the opposite surface of the scoring line (Fig. 5). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the orientation of the bender to bend toward the opposite surface of the scribe as an alternative arrangement known in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-3282140-A teaches the manual angle adjuster
US-8292141-B2 teaches the bender on the opposite side of the score line but bending in the opposite surface
US-20170057863-A1 could be used in substitution of the Markham reference
US-20200223735-A1 teaches claim 19 except for the supporter
WO-2020231892-A1 teaches of a vertically oriented glass ribbon scoring apparatus with plurality of direction drivers
WO-2021126542-A1 teaches the angled scoring, first and second rail, and pivots
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2645. The examiner can normally be reached 9am - 5pm Mon-Thurs.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on 571-270-7001. 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.
/STEVEN S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/JODI C FRANKLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights