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 .
The status of the 04/25/2025 claims, is as follows: Claims 1-3, 6, 9, and 19 have been amended; Claim 10 has been canceled; and claims 1-9, and 11-21 are pending.
Applicant's request for reconsideration of the finality of the rejection of the last
Office action is persuasive and therefore the finality of that action is withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-9, 21, and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1:
The phrase “an output of the power conversion circuitry” in line 24 should be read “an output of power conversion circuitry” because it is the first instance of “power conversion circuitry” recited.
In claim 7:
The phrase “the wire feeder” in line 2 should be read “a wire feeder” because it is the first instance of “wire feeder” recited.
In claim 16:
The phrase “the wire feeder” in line 2 should be read “a wire feeder” because it is the first instance of “wire feeder” recited.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
In claim 1 (similarly applying to claim 11):
The limitation “a first input device” in line 3
“device” is the generic placeholder.
“input” is the functional language.
In claim 8 (similarly applying to claim 17):
The limitation “a second input device” in line 2
“device” is the generic placeholder.
“input” is the functional language.
In claim 20:
The limitation “a display device”
“device” is the generic placeholder.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that, the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
The limitation “a first input device" of claim 1 has been described in originally-filed specification in para. 0055 as a wire feed speed adjustment knob 224 that enables the adjustment of wire feed speed output by a wire feeder 104.
The limitation “a second input device" of claim 8 has been described in originally-filed specification in para. 0055 as a voltage adjustment knob 222.
The limitation “a display device" of claim 20 has been described in originally-filed specification in para. 0068 as display 220.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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.
Claims 1-4, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knoener’717 (US 20160271717) in view of Dantinner (US 20090152251)
Regarding Claim 1, Knoener’717 discloses a welding equipment interface (user interface 38 for a welding system 10; fig. 2), comprising:
a first button (welding process selector 40) (para. 0019. The selector 40 allows the user to selector a welding process i.e. MIG), the first button also allows the user to select the wire type, i.e. aluminum electrode, the first button also allows the user to select the gas type i.e. argon,
a first input device (wire feed speed adjustment dial 44) configured to adjust a wire feed speed (wire feed speed) (para. 0020), wherein the dial 44 also allows the user to select the wire size (electrode size) (para. 0020); and
a display (display) (para. 0028-0029);
control circuitry (control circuitry) configured to:
in response to an input from the first button (welding process selector 40), select a welding process of power conversion circuitry (welding process) based on a sequence of welding processes (plurality of welding processes) (para. 0019);
in response to an input from the first button, select an electrode wire type (electrode type i.e. aluminum) based on a sequence of electrode wire types (electrode types i.e. aluminum, steel etc.) (para. 0019);
in response to an input from the dial 44, select an electrode wire size (electrode size i.e. 0.024”) based on a sequence of electrode wire sizes (0.024″, 0.030″, and 0.035″ etc.) (para. 0020);
in response to an input from the first button (welding process selector 40), select a shielding gas composition (gas type i.e. argon) from a sequence of shielding gas compositions (C25, C100, Argon, etc.) (para. 0019);
based on input via the first input device (wire feed speed adjustment dial 44), select a wire feed speed (wire feed speed) (para. 0020);
based on the selected wire feed speed (wire feed speed), automatically select a voltage (voltage) based on a relationship between the wire feed speed and the voltage, the relationship based on the electrode wire size (based on the size of the wire electrode) (it is noted Stanzel (US 20070181553), which is incorporated by reference, discloses the linkage between the voltage and the wire feed speed during “auto” setting, which determines the wire feed speed based on the selected voltage, para. 0018-0020);
determine, based on the wire feed speed (wire feed speed) selected via the first input device (wire feed speed adjustment dial 44), a material thickness (material thickness) corresponding to the wire feed speed (wire feed speed) selected via the first input device (wire feed speed adjustment dial 44) (“the control circuitry 30 and/or the auto-set function may automatically adjust one or more of the welding process, voltage (or amperage or power), wire feed speed, material thickness, electrode diameter, or other operating parameter to enable workable, feasible operation of the welding system”, para. 0026);
display the determined material thickness (material thickness) on the display (para. 0028-0029); and
control at least one of an output of the power conversion circuitry (internal circuity of power source 16) based on the selected voltage (voltage) (para. 0017 and 0013).
Knoener’717 does not disclose:
a second button, a third button, and a fourth button.
However, Dantinne discloses a user interface 26 comprising a second button (electrode switch 42; fig. 6) (para. 0019. It is noted the switch 42 allows the user to select an electrode type i.e. E6010), a third button (wire size switch 56) (para. 0022. It is noted the switch 56 allows the user the select the electrode size i.e. 0.035”), and a fourth button (gas selection button 60) (para. 0023. It is noted the button 60 allows the user to select the gas type i.e. mixture of argon and carbon dioxide).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated button, i.e. second button, separate from the selector 40 such that the user can select the wire type, to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated button, i.e. third button, separate from the selector 44 such that the user can select the wire size, and to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated button, i.e. fourth button separate from the selector 40 such that the user can select the gas type as taught by Dantinne. Doing so would simplify the design and provide ease for the user by using the separate buttons for associated settings such as the wire type, wire size, and gas type.
Regarding Claim 2, the modification discloses the first button (welding process selector 40 of Knoener’717), the second button (electrode switch 42 of Dantinne), the third button (wire size switch 56 of Dantinne), and the fourth button (gas selection button 60 of Dantinne) comprise software buttons implemented on the display (para. 0028-0029 of Knoener’717).
Regarding Claim 3, the modification discloses the control circuitry (control circuit 30 of Knoener’717) is configured to:
in response to the input from the first button (welding process selector 40 of Knoener’717), output an indication of the welding process via the display (display of Knoener’717) (para. 0028-0029 of Knoener’717);
in response to an input from the second button (electrode switch 42 of Dantinne), output an indication of the electrode wire type (wire type) via the display (display of Knoener’717) (para. 0028-0029 of Knoener’717);
in response to an input from the third button (wire size switch 56 of Dantinne), output an indication of the electrode wire size (wire size) via the display (display of Knoener’717) (para. 0028-0029 of Knoener’717); and
in response to an input from the fourth button (gas selection button 60 of Dantinne), output an indication of the shielding gas composition (gas type) via the display (display of Knoener’717) (para. 0028-0029 of Knoener’717).
Regarding Claim 4, Knoener’717 discloses the control circuitry (control circuitry 30) is configured to select a welding program (operating parameter) based on the welding process (welding process), the electrode wire type (wire type), the electrode wire size (wire size), and the shielding gas composition (gas type) (para. 0026-007).
Regarding Claim 6, Knoener’717 discloses the power conversion circuitry (internal circuity of power source 16) is configured to convert input power to welding power based on the voltage, the control circuitry (control circuitry 30) configured to control the power conversion circuitry (para. 0013, 0017, and 0026).
Regarding Claim 7, Knoener’717 discloses the interface, further comprising the wire feeder (wire feeder) configured to feed an electrode wire based on the wire feed speed (wire feed speed) (para. 0006).
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Knoener’717 (US 20160271717) and Dantinner (US 20090152251) as applied to claim 4 and 1 respectively, further in view of Stanzel (US 20070181553)
Regarding Claim 5, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above. Knoener’717 discloses the control circuitry (control circuitry 30) is configured to, in response to an input from the voltage adjustment dial 42 (para. 0017), display the selected voltage (voltage) (para. 0028-0029).
The modification does not disclose the input is entered using a fifth button.
However, Stanzel discloses a fifth button (voltage controller 40) is utilized to input voltage selection (para. 0017).
PNG
media_image1.png
506
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated fifth button (i.e. voltage controller 40 of Stanzel), separate from the material thickness, such that the user can select voltage using the fifth button. Doing so would simplify the design and provide ease for the user by using the separate button dedicated for voltage setting.
Regarding Claim 8, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above. Knoener’717 discloses the control circuitry (control circuitry 30) is configured to modify the voltage based on an input to the voltage adjustment dial 42 (para. 0017).
The modification does not disclose the input is entered using a second input device.
However, Stanzel discloses a second input device (voltage controller 40) is utilized to input voltage selection (para. 0017).
PNG
media_image1.png
506
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide the dedicated second input device (i.e. voltage controller 40 of Stanzel), separate from the material thickness, such that the user can select voltage using the second input device. Doing so would simplify the design and provide ease for the user by using the separate button dedicated for voltage setting.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Knoener’717 (US 20160271717), Dantinner (US 20090152251), and Stanzel (US 20070181553) as applied to claim 8, further in view of Knoener’429 (US 20120241429)
Regarding Claim 9, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the interface further comprising an indicator configured to output an indication of whether the voltage is within a voltage range, higher than the voltage range, or lower than the voltage range, the control circuitry configured to determine the voltage range based on the wire feed speed selected via the first input device.
However, Knoener’429 discloses an interface (user interface 38) further comprising an indicator (graphical range indicator 60) configured to output an indication of whether the voltage is within a voltage range, higher than the voltage range, or lower than the voltage range (acceptable ranges of values) (para. 0049), the control circuitry (control circuitry 30) configured to determine the voltage range (acceptable ranges of values) based on the wire feed speed selected via the first input device (dial 52) (para. 0049-0050) (it is noted Stanzel (US 20070181553), which is incorporated by reference, discloses the linkage between the voltage and the wire feed speed during “auto” setting, which determines the wire feed speed based on the selected voltage, para. 0018-0020 and 0012).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to include the indicator configured to indicate whether the voltage is within the acceptable voltage range or not, wherein the control circuitry is configured to determine the voltage range based on the selected wire feed speed. The interface would assist the operator to correctly set the voltage within the acceptable range based on the selected wire feed speed and other welding parameters.
Claims 21, 11-14, 16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Knoener’717 (US 20160271717) and Dantinner (US 20090152251), further in view of Sickels (US 20060196862)
Regarding Claim 21, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the control circuitry is configured to:
select the sequence of electrode wire types based on the selected welding process;
select the sequence of electrode wire sizes based on the selected electrode wire type; and
select the sequence of shielding gas compositions based on at least one of the selected welding process, the selected electrode wire type, or the selected electrode wire size.
However, Dantinne discloses the control circuitry (control circuitry 30) is configured to:
select the sequence of electrode wire types (multiple possible electrodes i.e. E6010 and E7018) based on the selected welding process (stick welding process) (para. 0019); and
select the sequence of shielding gas compositions (gas selection i.e. C8-C15, based on MIG type) based on the selected welding process (MIG welding process) (para. 0023).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the control circuitry of Knoener’717 such that it is configured to select the sequence of electrode wire types based on the selected welding process and it is configured to select the sequence of the shield gas composition based on the selected welding process as further taught by Dantinne. Doing so would further assist the operator to select the welding wire type that corresponds to the selected welding process by providing the options of welding wire types that only corresponds to the selected welding process. Similarly, the operator is assisted to select the gas type based on the selected welding process by providing the options of gas types that only corresponds to the selected welding process.
The modification does not disclose the control circuitry is configured to select the sequence of electrode wire sizes based on the selected electrode wire type.
However, Sickels discloses a table 1 that indicates known associations between the electrode wire size and the electrode wire type (para. 0043-0044 and 0066).
PNG
media_image2.png
292
494
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further configure the control circuitry of Knoener’717 to associate the sequence of the electrode wire sizes i.e. 0.030, 0.035 to the electrode wire type i.e. FCAW as known in the art to perform a certain welding process as taught by Sickels. Doing so would further assist the operator to select the appropriate wire size from the options of the electrode wire sizes that have known associations with the electrode wire type. For example, when the electrode wire type is selected, the operator is assisted by giving the options of the wire sizes that are associated with the selected electrode wire type.
Regarding Claim 11, Knoener’717 discloses a welding-type power supply (welding system 10; fig. 1), comprising:
power conversion circuitry (power supply 16) configured to convert input power to welding power based on an output voltage (voltage set by the voltage adjustment dial 42) (para. 0013 and 0017);
a first button (welding process selector 40) (para. 0019. The selector 40 allows the user to selector a welding process i.e. MIG), the first button also allows the user to select the wire type, i.e. aluminum electrode, the first button also allows the user to select the gas type i.e. argon,
a first input device (wire feed speed adjustment dial 44) configured to adjust a wire feed speed (wire feed speed) (para. 0020); and
control circuitry (control circuitry) configured to:
in response to an input from the first button (welding process selector 40), select the welding process of power conversion circuitry based on a sequence of welding processes (plurality of welding processes) (para. 0019);
in response to an input from the first button, select the electrode wire type (electrode type i.e. aluminum) based on a sequence of electrode wire types (electrode types i.e. aluminum, steel etc.) (para. 0019),
in response to an input from the dial 44, select the electrode wire size (electrode size i.e. 0.024”) based on a sequence of electrode wire sizes (0.024″, 0.030″, and 0.035″ etc.) (para. 0020),
in response to an input from the first button (welding process selector 40), select the shielding gas composition (gas type i.e. argon) from a sequence of shielding gas compositions (C25, C100, Argon, etc.) (para. 0019),
in response to input from the first input device (wire feed speed adjustment dial 44), select a wire feed speed (wire feed speed) (para. 0020);
based on the selected wire feed speed (wire feed speed), automatically select a voltage (voltage) based on a relationship between the wire feed speed and the voltage, the relationship based on the electrode wire size (based on the size of the wire electrode) (it is noted Stanzel (US 20070181553), which is incorporated by reference, discloses the linkage between the voltage and the wire feed speed during “auto” setting, which determines the wire feed speed based on the selected voltage, para. 0018-0020); and
control at least one of an output of the power conversion circuitry (power source 16) based on the selected voltage (voltage) (para. 0017 and 0013).
Knoener’717 does not disclose:
a second button, a third button, and a fourth button.
However, Dantinne discloses a user interface 26 comprising a second button (electrode switch 42; fig. 6) (para. 0019. It is noted the switch 42 allows the user to select an electrode type i.e. E6010), a third button (wire size switch 56) (para. 0022. It is noted the switch 56 allows the user the select the electrode size i.e. 0.035”), and a fourth button (gas selection button 60) (para. 0023. It is noted the button 60 allows the user to select the gas type i.e. mixture of argon and carbon dioxide).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated button, i.e. second button, separate from the selector 40 such that the user can select the wire type, to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated button, i.e. third button, separate from the selector 44 such that the user can select the wire size, and to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated button, i.e. fourth button separate from the selector 40 such that the user can select the gas type as taught by Dantinne. Doing so would simplify the design and provide ease for the user by using the separate buttons for associated settings such as wire type, wire size, and gas type.
The modification does not disclose:
the sequence of electrode wire types being set based on the selected welding process;
the sequence of electrode wire sizes being set based on the selected electrode wire type and the selected welding process;
the sequence of shielding gas compositions being set based on the selected electrode wire size, the selected electrode wire type, and the selected welding process.
However, Dantinne discloses an interface 26, wherein
the sequence of electrode wire types (multiple possible electrodes i.e. E6010 and E7018) is set based on the selected welding process (stick welding process) (para. 0019); and
the sequence of shielding gas compositions (gas selection i.e. C8-C15, based on MIG type) is based on the selected welding process (MIG welding process) (para. 0023).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the control circuitry of Knoener’717 such that it is configured to select the sequence of electrode wire types based on the selected welding process and it is configured to select the sequence of the shield gas composition based on the selected welding process as further taught by Dantinne. Doing so would further assist the operator to select the welding wire type that corresponds to the selected welding process by providing the options of welding wire types that only corresponds to the selected welding process. Similarly, the operator is assisted to select the gas type based on the selected welding process by providing the options of gas types that only corresponds to the selected welding process.
The modification does not disclose the sequence of electrode wire sizes is set based on the selected electrode wire type and the selected welding process.
However, Sickels discloses a table 1 that indicates the known associations between the electrode wire sizes and the electrode wire types (para. 0043-0044 and 0066).
PNG
media_image2.png
292
494
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further configure the control circuitry of Knoener’717 to associate the sequence of the electrode wire sizes i.e. 0.030, 0.035 to the electrode wire type i.e. FCAW as taught by Sickels. Doing so would further assist the operator to select the appropriate wire size i.e. 0.030 from the options of the electrode wire sizes i.e. 0.030 or 0.035 that have known associations with the electrode wire type i.e. FCAW. For example, when the electrode wire type is selected i.e. FCAW selected, the operator is assisted by giving the options of the wire sizes i.e. 0.030, or 0.035 that are associated with the selected electrode wire type i.e. FCAW.
The modification would result in the sequence of electrode wire sizes is set based on the selected electrode wire type and the selected welding process because Dantinne discloses the sequence of wire types is set based on the selected welding process (para. 0019; fig. 3) and Sickels discloses the wire type i.e. FCAW is associated with the wire sizes i.e. 0.030, or 0.035 according to Table 1, therefore the sequence of electrode wire sizes i.e. options of 0.030, or 0.035 are set based on the selected electrode wire type i.e. FCAW and indirectly based the selected welding process i.e. sticking welding because the wire sizes have known associations with the wire types and the wire types are associated with the welding process.
Advantageously, the operator can select the appropriate wire size from the options of the wire sizes that are set based on the electrode wire type and indirectly based on the welding process.
The modification does not disclose the sequence of shielding gas compositions being set based on the selected electrode wire size, the selected electrode wire type.
However, Sickels discloses a table 1 that indicates the known associations between the shielding gas, the electrode wire size, and the electrode wire type (para. 0043-0044 and 0066).
PNG
media_image2.png
292
494
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further configure the control circuitry of Knoener’717 to associate the sequence of the shielding gas with the electrode wire and the electrode type as taught by Sickels. Doing so would ensure that the operator selects the appropriate shielding gas from the options of the shield gas types that has known associations with the selected wire size and selected wire type. The modification would result in the sequence of shielding gas is set based on the selected electrode wire size, the selected electrode wire type, and the selected welding process because Dantinne discloses the sequence of gas types is set based on the selected welding process (para. 0023) and Sickels discloses the associations of the gas types, the wire sizes, and the wire types according to Table 1, therefore the sequence of gas is set based on the selected welding process (according to Dantinne, para. 0023) and is set based the selected wire size and the selected wire type because the wire sizes and the wire types have known associations with the types of shielding gas (Table 1 of Sickels).
Advantageously, the operator can select the appropriate gas type from the options of gas types that are set based on the welding process and are set based on the selected electrode wire size and selected electrode wire type.
Regarding Claim 12, the modification discloses the first button (welding process selector 40 of Knoener’717), the second button (electrode switch 42 of Dantinne), the third button (wire size switch 56 of Dantinne), and the fourth button (gas selection button 60 of Dantinne) comprise software buttons implemented on the display (para. 0028-0029 of Knoener’717).
Regarding Claim 13, the modification discloses the control circuitry (control circuit 30 of Knoener’717) is configured to:
in response to the input from the first button (welding process selector 40 of Knoener’717), output an indication of the welding process via the display (display of Knoener’717) (para. 0028-0029 of Knoener’717);
in response to an input from the second button (electrode switch 42 of Dantinne), output an indication of the electrode wire type (wire type) via the display (display of Knoener’717) (para. 0028-0029 of Knoener’717);
in response to an input from the third button (wire size switch 56 of Dantinne), output an indication of the electrode wire size (wire size) via the display (display of Knoener’717) (para. 0028-0029 of Knoener’717); and
in response to an input from the fourth button (gas selection button 60 of Dantinne), output an indication of the shielding gas composition (gas type) via the display (display of Knoener’717) (para. 0028-0029 of Knoener’717).
Regarding Claim 14, Knoener’717 discloses the control circuitry (control circuitry 30) is configured to select a welding program (operating parameter) based on the welding process (welding process), the electrode wire type (wire type), the electrode wire size (wire size), and the shielding gas composition (gas type) (para. 0026-007).
Regarding Claim 16, Knoener’717 discloses the interface, further comprising the wire feeder (wire feeder) configured to feed an electrode wire based on the wire feed speed (wire feed speed) (para. 0006).
Regarding Claim 19, Knoener’717 discloses a method, comprising:
receiving, via a first button (welding process selector 40) (para. 0019. The selector 40 allows the user to selector a welding process i.e. MIG), a selection of a welding process from a sequence of welding processes, the first button also allows the user to select the wire type, i.e. aluminum electrode, the first button also allows the user to select the gas type i.e. argon,
receiving, via the first button (welding process selector 40), a selection of an electrode wire type (wire type) from the sequence of electrode wire types (para. 0019);
receiving, via a third button (dial 44), a selection of an electrode wire size (electrode size i.e. 0.024”) from the sequence of electrode wire sizes (0.024″, 0.030″, and 0.035″ etc.) (para. 0020);
receiving, via the first button (welding process selector 40), a selection of a shielding gas composition (gas type i.e. argon) from the sequence of shielding gas compositions (para. 0019);
receiving, via an input device (wire feed speed adjustment dial 44), a selection of a wire feed speed (wire feed speed) (para. 0020);
based on the selected wire feed speed (wire feed speed), selecting, via control circuitry (control circuitry), a voltage (voltage) based on a relationship between the wire feed speed and the voltage, the relationship based on the electrode wire size (based on the size of the wire electrode) (it is noted Stanzel (US 20070181553), which is incorporated by reference, discloses the linkage between the voltage and the wire feed speed during “auto” setting, which determines the wire feed speed based on the selected voltage, para. 0018-0020) and
controlling, via the control circuitry (control circuitry), at least one of an output of power conversion circuitry (internal circuity of power source 16) based on the selected voltage (voltage) (para. 0017 and 0013).
Knoener’717 does not disclose:
a second button, a third button, and a fourth button.
However, Dantinne discloses a user interface 26 comprising a second button (electrode switch 42; fig. 6) (para. 0019. It is noted the switch 42 allows the user to select an electrode type i.e. E6010), a third button (wire size switch 56) (para. 0022. It is noted the switch 56 allows the user the select the electrode size i.e. 0.035”), and a fourth button (gas selection button 60) (para. 0023. It is noted the button 60 allows the user to select the gas type i.e. mixture of argon and carbon dioxide).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated button, i.e. second button, separate from the selector 40 such that the user can select the wire type, to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated button, i.e. third button, separate from the selector 44 such that the user can select the wire size, and to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated button, i.e. fourth button separate from the selector 40 such that the user can select the gas type as taught by Dantinne. Doing so would simplify the design and provide ease for the user by using the separate buttons for associated settings such as wire type, wire size, and gas type.
The modification does not disclose:
setting a sequence of electrode wire types based on the selected welding process;
setting a sequence of electrode wire sizes based on the selected electrode wire type and the selected welding process; and
setting a sequence of shielding gas compositions based on the selected electrode wire size, the selected electrode wire type, and the selected welding process;
However, Dantinne discloses the sequence of electrode wire types (multiple possible electrodes i.e. E6010 and E7018) is set based on the selected welding process (stick welding process) (para. 0019); and
the sequence of shielding gas compositions (gas selection i.e. C8-C15, based on MIG type) is based on the selected welding process (MIG welding process) (para. 0023).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the control circuitry of Knoener’717 such that it is configured to select the sequence of electrode wire types based on the selected welding process and it is configured to select the sequence of the shield gas composition based on the selected welding process as further taught by Dantinne. Doing so would further assist the operator to select the welding wire type from the options of wire types that are set based the selected welding process and to select the shield gas from the options of gas types that are set based on the selected welding process.
The modification does not disclose the sequence of electrode wire sizes is set based on the selected electrode wire type and the selected welding process.
However, Sickels discloses a table 1 that indicates the associations between the electrode wire sizes and the electrode wire types (para. 0043-0044 and 0066).
PNG
media_image2.png
292
494
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further configure the control circuitry of Knoener’717 to associate the sequence of the electrode wire sizes i.e. 0.030, 0.035 to the electrode wire type i.e. FCAW as taught by Sickels. Doing so would ensure that the operator selects the appropriate wire size i.e. 0.030 from the options of the wire sizes that have known associations with the wire type i.e. FCAW. For example, when the electrode wire type is selected i.e. FCAW selected, the operator is assisted by giving the options of the wire sizes i.e. 0.030, or 0.035 that are associated with the selected electrode wire type i.e. FCAW.
The modification would result in the sequence of electrode wire sizes is set based on the selected electrode wire type and the selected welding process because Dantinne discloses the sequence of wire types is set based on the selected welding process (para. 0019; fig. 3) and Sickels discloses the wire type i.e. FCAW is associated with the wire sizes i.e. 0.030, or 0.035 according to Table 1, therefore the sequence of electrode wire sizes i.e. options of 0.030, or 0.035 is set based on the selected electrode wire type i.e. FCAW and indirectly based the selected welding process sticking welding, because the wire sizes have known associations with the wire types and the wire types are associated with the welding process.
Advantageously, the operator can select the appropriate wire size from the options of the wire sizes that are set based on the electrode wire type and indirectly based on the welding process.
The modification does not disclose the sequence of shielding gas compositions being set based on the selected electrode wire size and the selected electrode wire type.
However, Sickels discloses a table 1 that indicates the known associations between the shielding gas, the electrode wire size, and the electrode wire type (para. 0043-0044 and 0066).
PNG
media_image2.png
292
494
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further configure the control circuitry of Knoener’717 to associate the sequence of the shielding gas with the electrode wire and the electrode type as taught by Sickels. Doing so would ensure that the operator selects the appropriate shielding gas from the options of the shield gas types that has known associations with the selected wire size and selected wire type. The modification would result in the sequence of shielding gas is set based on the selected electrode wire size, the selected electrode wire type, and the selected welding process because Dantinne discloses the sequence of gas types is set based on the selected welding process (para. 0023) and Sickels discloses the associations of the gas types, the wire sizes, and the wire types according to Table 1, therefore the options of gas are set based on the selected welding process (according to Dantinne, para. 0023) and are set based the selected wire size and the selected wire type because the wire sizes and the wire types have known associations with the types of shielding gas (Table 1 of Sickels).
Advantageously, the operator can select the appropriate gas type from the options of gas types that are set based on the welding process and are set based on the selected electrode wire size and selected electrode wire type.
Regarding Claim 20, Knoener’717 discloses the method further comprising:
determining, via the control circuitry (control circuitry), a workpiece thickness (material thickness) corresponding to the selected wire feed speed (wire feed speed) in response to the selection of the wire feed speed (“the control circuitry 30 and/or the auto-set function may automatically adjust one or more of the welding process, voltage (or amperage or power), wire feed speed, material thickness, electrode diameter, or other operating parameter to enable workable, feasible operation of the welding system”, para. 0026); and
displaying the workpiece thickness (material thickness) on a display device (display) (para. 0028-0029).
Claims 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Knoener’717 (US 20160271717), Dantinner (US 20090152251), and Sickels (US 20060196862) as applied to claim 14 and claim 11 respectively, further in view of Stanzel (US 20070181553)
Regarding Claim 15, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above. Knoener’717 discloses the control circuitry (control circuitry 30) is configured to, in response to an input from the voltage adjustment dial 42 (para. 0017), display the selected voltage (voltage) (para. 0028-0029).
The modification does not disclose the input is entered using a fifth button.
However, Stanzel discloses a fifth button (voltage controller 40) is utilized to input voltage selection (para. 0017).
PNG
media_image1.png
506
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated fifth button (i.e. voltage controller 40 of Stanzel), separate from the material thickness, such that the user can select voltage using the fifth button. Doing so would simplify the design and provide ease for the user by using the separate button dedicated for voltage setting.
Regarding Claim 17, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above. Knoener’717 discloses the control circuitry (control circuitry 30) is configured to modify the voltage based on an input to the voltage adjustment dial 42 (para. 0017).
The modification does not disclose the input is entered using a second input device.
However, Stanzel discloses a fifth button (voltage controller 40) is utilized to input voltage selection (para. 0017).
PNG
media_image1.png
506
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to provide a dedicated second input device (i.e. voltage controller 40 of Stanzel), separate from the material thickness, such that the user can select voltage using the second input device. Doing so would simplify the design and provide ease for the user by using the separate button dedicated for voltage setting.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Knoener’717 (US 20160271717), Dantinner (US 20090152251), Sickels (US 20060196862), and Stanzel (US 20070181553) as applied to claim 17, further in view of Knoener’429 (US 20120241429)
Regarding Claim 18, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the interface further comprising an indicator configured to output an indication of whether the voltage is within a voltage range, higher than the voltage range, or lower than the voltage range, the control circuitry configured to determine the voltage range based on the wire feed speed selected via the first input device.
However, Knoener’429 discloses an interface (user interface 38) further comprising an indicator (graphical range indicator 60) configured to output an indication of whether the voltage is within a voltage range, higher than the voltage range, or lower than the voltage range (acceptable ranges of values) (para. 0049), the control circuitry (control circuitry 30) configured to determine the voltage range (acceptable ranges of values) based on the wire feed speed selected via the first input device (dial 52) (para. 0049-0050) (it is noted Stanzel (US 20070181553), which is incorporated by reference, discloses the linkage between the voltage and the wire feed speed during “auto” setting, which determines the wire feed speed based on the selected voltage, para. 0018-0020 and 0012).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interface of Knoener’717 to include the indicator configured to indicate whether the voltage is within the acceptable voltage range or not, wherein the control circuitry is configured to determine the voltage range based on the selected wire feed speed. The interface would assist the operator to correctly set the voltage within the acceptable range based on the selected wire feed speed and other welding parameters.
Response to Amendment
With respect to 112b rejections: since amendments made to the claims, therefore 112b rejections are withdrawn.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed on 04/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are considered moot in view of new ground of rejections set forth in the present Office Action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BONITA KHLOK whose telephone number is (571)270-7313. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9:00am-6pm.
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, IBRAHIME ABRAHAM can be reached on (571) 270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BONITA KHLOK/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights