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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 1, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3-6 and 9-14 are objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
In clam 1, line 11, what is the word “they” referring to? Please clarify.
In claim 11, line 18, what is the word “they” referring to? Please clarify.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-6 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention..
The specification, as originally filed, does not disclose the claimed feature where “selecting a wavelength for the ultrasonic guided waves … ultrasonic guided wave transducer”, as presently claimed. There is no such language or interpretation of this “selecting a wavelength for the ultrasonic guided waves” in the original filed specification. This is new matters that was not originally disclosed in the specification, as originally filed.
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.
Claims 1, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0278193 (Breon et al.) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0318249 (S. et al.) and U.S. Patent Application Publication 2009/0199642 (Fukutomi et al.).
With regards to claim 1, Breon et al. discloses a non-destructive testing system comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-17, a method of testing for defects or welds (e.g. cracks, corrosion, welds, holes, wall thinning and other geometric features; Figures 1,4; paragraphs [0020],[0039],[0040]) of a pipeline 101,201 (e.g. pipe structure; Figures 1,4,7; paragraphs [0020]) such that the welds (e.g. welds are formed by joining metal pieces/parts together by heating; hence, the pipes would be joined together at its ends) being around the circumference of the pipeline’s walls (e.g. the end wall of each pipe is welded together around its circumference to join the end walls of the pipes together) comprising steps of determining orientations (e.g. step 135 indicates information of where the array of transducers are to be mounted and area of where the pipe is to be inspected; Figure 17; paragraph [0055]; Figures 4-7 illustrate different orientation for the array of transducers) of one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 505,105 (e.g. a transducer; paragraphs [0037],[0038]; Figures 7,4,1) on a surface of a pipeline (e.g. positioned directly onto pipe structure 201; paragraphs [0037],[0039]; Figure 7) such that the transducers will transmit guided waves 531,231,103 (e.g. guided wave energy; paragraph [0037]; Figures 7,4) toward a weld (e.g. welds; paragraphs [0020],[0039],[0040]) at an angle (e.g. wave guide 531 is emitted at an angle; paragraph [0037]; Figure 7) that is not orthogonal to the weld such that a defect 313,113 (e.g. defect; paragraph [0031] will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers; at least two of the ultrasonic wave transducers have different orientation relative to the weld such that they receive varying amplitudes of the diffuse reflected waves (e.g. differing amplitudes; paragraphs [0026],[0040], [0041],[0055],[0056]; Figures 4-7 illustrate different orientation for the array of transducers); the ultrasonic guided wave transducers 505,105 are configured to emit torsional guided waves (e.g. torsional guided wave mode; paragraphs [0038],[0039],[0064]); placing the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 505,105 flat against a surface of the pipeline at the orientation determined in the previous step (e.g. positioned directly onto pipe structure 201; paragraphs [0037],[0039],[0055]; Figures 7,1,3); delivering the guided waves 531,231,103 from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers directly into the pipeline such that the guided waves travel directly from the transducer and travel longitudinally along the pipeline walls (e.g. paragraph [0025] indicates the guided wave energy 103 travels directly through the pipe structure 101 where the guided waves travel longitudinal along the length of the pipeline for a distance until it reaches a weld 113; Figure 1); receiving reflection data that primarily represents diffuse reflections from a defect in a weld from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers (e.g. reflected wave energy 315 is reflected of from a defect 313; paragraph [0031]); processing 301,450,185 (e.g. controller 301 along with computer system to analyze, process and determine location of defect; paragraphs [0031],[0057]) the reflection data to indicate a defect or weld is present and using the varying amplitudes to determine defect orientation or extent (e.g. controller 31 determine location of defect based on reflected signals; paragraphs [0031],[0061],[0026],[0040],[0041],[0056]). (See, paragraphs [0020] to [0064]).
The only difference between the prior art and the claimed invention are: 1) Breon et al. does not explicitly specify testing for defects in welds such that specular reflections from the weld do not return to the transducers but a defect in the weld will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers; 2) selecting a wavelength for the ultrasonic guided waves such that only defects smaller than the wavelength will reflect a signal back to the ultrasonic guided wave transducer.
For difference 1), S. et al. discloses an ultrasonic weld inspection system comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-8, a method of testing for defects in welds (e.g. defect in weld; paragraphs [0022],[0029],[0030]) of a pipeline 16A,16B (e.g. pipe; paragraph [0022]) such that the welds being around the circumference of the pipeline comprising steps of determining an orientation Wa (e.g. hypotenuse side 46 extends at an angle; paragraph [0032]; Figure 3) of one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 10,C (e.g. the ultrasonic probe includes a plurality of ultrasonic transducer elements; paragraphs [0022],[0028]) on a surface 20 (e.g. planar surface; paragraph [0022]) of a pipeline such that the transducers will transmit guided waves 36,36B,36B (e.g. ultrasonic beam; paragraph [0029]) toward a weld 12 (e.g. weld; paragraphs [0022],[0023]) at an angle BA (e.g. beam angle as beam enters; paragraph [0053]) that is not orthogonal (e.g. as observed in Figure 3) to the weld and such that specular reflections from the weld do not return to the transducers (e.g. waves 36B do not proceed and enter into the area of interest of the weld and will not provide useful data concerning weld analysis such that waves 36B can be segregated out; paragraphs [0008],[0034],[0038]) but a defect in the weld will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers (e.g. waves 36A proceed and enter into the area of interest of the weld and will provide useful data concerning weld analysis such that waves 36A can be analyzed to make a determination about various characteristics of the weld including defects; paragraphs [0029], [0030],[0038]); delivering the guided waves 36,36B,36B from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 10,C directly into the pipeline such that the guided waves travel from the transducer along the pipeline walls for an un-predetermined distance to a weld (e.g. the ultrasonic probe having the transducers is moved relative to the weld and is place at a moderate distance from the weld such that the positioning of the ultrasonic probe is randomly chosen where the distance to the weld is not predetermined; paragraphs [0026],[0029],[0033], [0034]; Figure 3); receiving reflection data that primarily represents diffuse reflections from a defect in a weld from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers (e.g. paragraphs [0029],[0030],[0038]); processing the reflection data to indicate a defect is present in the weld (e.g. paragraphs [0029],[0030]). (See, paragraphs [0022] to [0080]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have readily recognize the advantages and desirability of employing the concept of testing for defects in welds such that specular reflections from the weld do not return to the transducers but a defect in the weld will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers as suggested by S. et al. in lieu of testing welds or defects in the system of Breon et al. to have the ability to analyze the reflected signals to determine various characteristics of the weld including defects, like imperfections, deformities, void, impurities and the like without departing from the scope of the invention (See, paragraphs [0029]-[0030] of S. et al.). At the same time, although S. et al. has the transducer mounted on a wedge, it is a matter of choice and a well-known concept (e.g. as evidenced by Breon et al. in paragraph [0039] that the transducers can be mounted on a wedge or the transducers mounted directly on the test structure) to the operator and/or manufacturer to have the transducer mounted on a wedge or not mounted on a wedge would have been obvious to a skilled artisan of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention without altering and/or changing the operation and/or performance of the transducer, namely to transmit ultrasonic guided waves and to receive reflected ultrasonic guided waves. Furthermore, the concept of ultrasonic testing for defects in welds such that specular reflections from the weld do not return to the transducers but a defect in the weld will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers is a well-known concept as evidenced by U.S. Patent 6,405,596 issued to Kruzic in column 5, line 54 to column 6, line 29 and column 6, lines 47-54 and as illustrated in Figures 8-10.
For difference 2), Fukutomi et al. discloses an ultrasonic flaw detection system comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-11, a method of testing for defects 20 (e.g. flaw; paragraph [0076]; Figures 6,7) in welds of a pipeline 6 (e.g. specimen like a pipe; paragraphs [0016],[0080]) comprising an ultrasonic guided wave transducer 21 (e.g. angle transmission probe; paragraph [0066]) on a surface of a pipeline such that the transducer will transmit guided waves 16 (e.g. ultrasonic wave; paragraph [0068]) toward a weld at an angle that is not orthogonal to the weld and such that specular reflections 18 (e.g. diffracted wave; paragraph [0068]) from the weld do not return to the transducers but a defect (e.g. minute flaw; paragraphs [0011],[0061]) in the weld will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers (e.g. paragraphs [0079],[0077],[0061],[0066],[0072] to [0080]); selecting a wavelength for the ultrasonic guided waves such that only defects smaller than the wavelength will reflect a signal back to the ultrasonic guided wave transducer (e.g. paragraphs [0011],[0079],[0077],[0025]). (See, paragraphs [0057] to [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have readily recognize the advantages and desirability of employing selecting a wavelength for the ultrasonic guided waves such that only defects smaller than the wavelength will reflect a signal back to the ultrasonic guided wave transducer as suggested by Fukutomi et al. to the system of Breon et al. to have the ability to enable thick test objects resolving small-sized internal defects with more accuracy to produce a sharper image with a high spatial resolution. (See, paragraphs [0061],[0080] of Fukutomi et al.).
With regards to claim 5, Breon et al. further discloses the structure 101,201 is a pipeline (e.g. pipeline; paragraphs [0001],[0002],[0023]); the placing step is performed by placing the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 505 against an outside wall (e.g. outer surface) of the pipeline (e.g. paragraph [0023]; as observed in Figures 1,7).
With regards to claim 6, Breon et al. further discloses the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 505 is a single transducer (e.g. paragraphs [0037],[0021],[0032]); moving the single transducer around the outer wall at a fixed distance from the weld (e.g. paragraph [0058], as observed in Figures 1,7,9,10).
Claims 3-4 and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0278193 (Breon et al.) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0318249 (S. et al.) and U.S. Patent Application Publication 2009/0199642 (Fukutomi et al.), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2010/0199767 (Ganin).
With regards to claim 3, Breon et al. further discloses the structure is a pipeline 101,201 (e.g. pipe structure; Figures 1,7; paragraphs [0020]) ; however, the reference does not disclose the placing step is performed by placing the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers against an inside wall of the pipeline.
Ganin discloses a non-destructive in-line inspection system comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-22, a method of testing for defects in welds (e.g. paragraphs [0003],[0035]) of a structure 161 (e.g. pipeline; paragraph [0044]; Figures 6,7) comprising placing one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 3,4,21-26 (e.g. EMAT array belt made up of a plurality of EMAT housing where each EMAT is formed of a cluster made up of 1 transmitting EMAT and 2 receiving EMAT; paragraphs [0039],[0042],[0048]; Figures 8-14) flat against a surface (e.g. interior surface; paragraphs [0038],[0044]) of the structure; the placing is performed such that guided waves (e.g. excited waves propagate in direction 154 along pipeline longitudinal axis 164; paragraphs [0004],[0044],[0045],[0046]; Figures 5-6) move from the one or more transducers directly into a plane that coincides with a plane of the underlying surface of the structure (e.g. paragraphs [0010],[0035],[0044],[0046]; Figures 5-10); the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 3,4,21-26 are orientated such that the guided waves from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers are directed toward a weld at an angle α to the weld (e.g. paragraph [0049]; as observed in Figure 8); delivering the guided waves from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 3,4,21-26 (e.g. paragraphs [0044] to [0049]); receiving reflection data from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers (e.g. paragraphs [0044] to [0049]); processing the reflection data to indicate if a defect is present in the weld (paragraphs [0003],[0038],[0058]) such that a larger portion of reflected guided waves from the weld is not received by any active one(s) of the one or more transducers (e.g. paragraphs [0049] to [0056]; Figures 7-12C); the structure 161 is a pipeline (e.g. pipe; paragraph [0044]); the placing step is performed by placing the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 3,4 against an inside wall of the pipeline (e.g. in-line inspection of internal inspection; paragraphs [0003],[0005],[0039]). (See, paragraphs [0034] to [0070]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have readily recognize the advantages and desirability of employing the placing step is performed by placing the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers against an inside wall of the pipeline as suggested by Ganin in lieu of placing against an outside wall of the pipeline in the system of Breon, as modified by S. et al. and Fukutomi et al., to have the ability to provide better protection and prevention of damages to the transducers from external impact. More so, to have place the transducers inside or outside the pipeline is a mere choice possibilities for the user/manufacturer and are well-known concepts as indicated in paragraph [0006] for placing the transducers outside the pipeline and in paragraphs [0003],[0005] for placing the transducers inside the pipeline without departing from the scope of the invention.
With regards to claim 4, Ganin further discloses the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 3,4,21-26 is a single transducer; moving the single transducer around the inner wall (e.g. internal inspection; paragraphs [0003],[0005],[0039]) at a fixed distance from the weld.
With regards to claim 9, Ganin further discloses the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 3,4 are EMATs (Electro Magnetic Acoustic Transducers). (See, paragraphs [0039],[0042]; Figures 3,7).
With regards to claim 10, Ganin further discloses processing the received reflection data (paragraph [0038]); however, the reference does not explicitly specify the processing step is performed with a synthetic aperture focusing technique (SAFT) process. However, to have employ such processing technique, like a SAFT process, is considered to have been a matter of choice possibilities and a well-known processing technique (note: as evidenced in U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0227037 by Maxfield et al. in paragraph [0104]) to an artisan of skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention without departing from the scope of the invention, namely to detect anomalies in the test structure.
With regards to claim 11, Breon et al. discloses a non-destructive testing system comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-17, an improved ultrasonic guided wave inline testing device for detecting defects or welds (e.g. cracks, corrosion, welds, holes, wall thinning and other geometric features; Figures 1,4; paragraphs [0020],[0039],[0040]) of a pipeline 101,201 (e.g. pipe structure; Figures 1,7; paragraph [0020]) comprising a circular ring to which an array of ultrasonic guided wave transducers 205,505 (e.g. array of transducers in ring form around the pipeline; Figures 6,7; paragraphs [0036],[0037],[0038] is attached (e.g. positioned directly onto pipe structure 201; paragraphs [0037],[0039]; Figure 7); the transducers are arranged such that guided waves 103 move from the array of transducers into the pipeline such that the guided waves travel directly from the transducer along the pipeline walls to a weld (e.g. paragraph [0025] indicates the guided wave energy 103 travels directly through the pipe structure 101 where the guided waves travel longitudinal along the length of the pipeline for a distance until it reaches a weld 113; Figure 1); the ultrasonic guided wave transducers are configured to emit torsional guided waves (e.g. torsional guided wave mode; paragraphs [0038],[0039],[0064]); the transducers will transmit guided waves 531,231,103 (e.g. guided wave energy; paragraph [0037]; Figures 7,4) toward a weld (e.g. welds; paragraphs [0020],[0039],[0040]) at an angle (e.g. wave guide 531 is emitted at an angle; paragraph [0037]; Figure 7) that is not orthogonal to the weld and such that specular reflections from the weld do not return to the transducers but will return diffuse reflected waves (e.g. torsional guided wave mode; paragraphs [0038],[0039],[0064]) to the transducers; at least two of the ultrasonic wave transducers have different orientation relative to the weld such that they receive varying amplitudes of the diffuse reflected waves (e.g. differing amplitudes; paragraphs [0026],[0040], [0041],[0055],[0056]; Figures 4-7 illustrate different orientation for the array of transducers); a process 301,450,185 (e.g. controller 301 along with computer system to analyze, process and determine location of defect; paragraphs [0031],[0057]) operable to analyze data reflected from any weld within a propagation distance of the ultrasonic waves and to determine if a defect is present in the weld and to use the varying amplitudes to determine defect orientation or extent (e.g. controller 31 determine location of defect based on reflected signals; paragraphs [0031],[0061],[0026],[0040],[0041],[0056]). (See, paragraphs [0020] to [0064]).
The only differences between the prior art and the claimed invention are: 1) Breon et al. does not explicitly specify testing for defects in welds such that specular reflections from the weld do not return to the transducers but a defect in the weld will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers; 2) the ultrasonic guided wave transducers are orientated such that, when the inline testing device is placed within the pipeline; 3) the ultrasonic guided waves emit the guided waves at a wavelength such that only defects smaller than the wavelength will reflect a signal back to the ultrasonic guided wave transducer.
For difference 1), S. et al. discloses an ultrasonic weld inspection system comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-8, a method of testing for defects in welds (e.g. defect in weld; paragraphs [0022],[0029],[0030]) of a pipeline 16A,16B (e.g. pipe; paragraph [0022]) such that the welds being around the circumference of the pipeline comprising steps of determining an orientation Wa (e.g. hypotenuse side 46 extends at an angle; paragraph [0032]; Figure 3) of one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 10,C (e.g. the ultrasonic probe includes a plurality of ultrasonic transducer elements; paragraphs [0022],[0028]) on a surface 20 (e.g. planar surface; paragraph [0022]) of a pipeline such that the transducers will transmit guided waves 36,36B,36B (e.g. ultrasonic beam; paragraph [0029]) toward a weld 12 (e.g. weld; paragraphs [0022],[0023]) at an angle BA (e.g. beam angle as beam enters; paragraph [0053]) that is not orthogonal (e.g. as observed in Figure 3) to the weld and such that specular reflections from the weld do not return to the transducers (e.g. waves 36B do not proceed and enter into the area of interest of the weld and will not provide useful data concerning weld analysis such that waves 36B can be segregated out; paragraphs [0008],[0034],[0038]) but a defect in the weld will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers (e.g. waves 36A proceed and enter into the area of interest of the weld and will provide useful data concerning weld analysis such that waves 36A can be analyzed to make a determination about various characteristics of the weld including defects; paragraphs [0029], [0030],[0038]); delivering the guided waves 36,36B,36B from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 10,C directly into the pipeline such that the guided waves travel from the transducer along the pipeline walls for an un-predetermined distance to a weld (e.g. the ultrasonic probe having the transducers is moved relative to the weld and is place at a moderate distance from the weld such that the positioning of the ultrasonic probe is randomly chosen where the distance to the weld is not predetermined; paragraphs [0026],[0029],[0033], [0034]; Figure 3); receiving reflection data that primarily represents diffuse reflections from a defect in a weld from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers (e.g. paragraphs [0029],[0030],[0038]); processing the reflection data to indicate a defect is present in the weld (e.g. paragraphs [0029],[0030]). (See, paragraphs [0022] to [0080]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have readily recognize the advantages and desirability of employing the concept of testing for defects in welds such that specular reflections from the weld do not return to the transducers but a defect in the weld will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers as suggested by S. et al. in lieu of testing welds or defects in the system of Breon et al. to have the ability to analyze the reflected signals to determine various characteristics of the weld including defects, like imperfections, deformities, void, impurities and the like without departing from the scope of the invention (See, paragraphs [0029]-[0030] of S. et al.). At the same time, although S. et al. has the transducer mounted on a wedge, it is a matter of choice and a well-known concept (e.g. as evidenced by Breon et al. in paragraph [0039] that the transducers can be mounted on a wedge or the transducers mounted directly on the test structure) to the operator and/or manufacturer to have the transducer mounted on a wedge or not mounted on a wedge would have been obvious to a skilled artisan of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention without altering and/or changing the operation and/or performance of the transducer, namely to transmit ultrasonic guided waves and to receive reflected ultrasonic guided waves. Furthermore, the concept of ultrasonic testing for defects in welds such that specular reflections from the weld do not return to the transducers but a defect in the weld will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers is a well-known concept as evidenced by U.S. Patent 6,405,596 issued to Kruzic in column 5, line 54 to column 6, line 29 and column 6, lines 47-54 and as illustrated in Figures 8-10.
For difference 2), Ganin discloses a non-destructive in-line inspection system comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-22, a method of testing for defects in welds (e.g. paragraphs [0003],[0035]) of a structure 161 (e.g. pipeline; paragraph [0044]; Figures 6,7) comprising placing one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 3,4,21-26 (e.g. EMAT array belt made up of a plurality of EMAT housing where each EMAT is formed of a cluster made up of 1 transmitting EMAT and 2 receiving EMAT; paragraphs [0039],[0042],[0048]; Figures 8-14) flat against a surface (e.g. interior surface; paragraphs [0038],[0044]) of the structure; the placing is performed such that guided waves (e.g. excited waves propagate in direction 154 along pipeline longitudinal axis 164; paragraphs [0004],[0044],[0045],[0046]; Figures 5-6) move from the one or more transducers directly into a plane that coincides with a plane of the underlying surface of the structure (e.g. paragraphs [0010],[0035],[0044],[0046]; Figures 5-10); the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 3,4,21-26 are orientated such that the guided waves from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers are directed toward a weld at an angle α to the weld (e.g. paragraph [0049]; as observed in Figure 8); delivering the guided waves from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers 3,4,21-26 (e.g. paragraphs [0044] to [0049]); receiving reflection data from the one or more ultrasonic guided wave transducers (e.g. paragraphs [0044] to [0049]); processing the reflection data to indicate if a defect is present in the weld (paragraphs [0003],[0038],[0058]) such that a larger portion of reflected guided waves from the weld is not received by any active one(s) of the one or more transducers (e.g. paragraphs [0049] to [0056]; Figures 7-12C); the structure 161 is a pipeline (e.g. pipe; paragraph [0044]); the ultrasonic guided wave transducers 3,4 are orientated such that, when the inline testing device is placed within the pipeline (e.g. in-line inspection of internal inspection; paragraphs [0003],[0005],[0039]). (See, paragraphs [0034] to [0070]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have readily recognize the advantages and desirability of employing the ultrasonic guided wave transducers are orientated such that, when the inline testing device is placed within the pipeline as suggested by Ganin in lieu of placing against an outside wall of the pipeline in the system of Breon to have the ability to provide better protection and prevention of damages to the transducers from external impact. More so, to have place the transducers within or outside the pipeline is a mere choice possibilities for the user/manufacturer and are well-known concepts as indicated in paragraph [0006] for placing the transducers outside the pipeline and in paragraphs [0003],[0005] for placing the transducers within the pipeline without departing from the scope of the invention.
For difference 3), Fukutomi et al. discloses an ultrasonic flaw detection system comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-11, a method of testing for defects 20 (e.g. flaw; paragraph [0076]; Figures 6,7) in welds of a pipeline 6 (e.g. specimen like a pipe; paragraphs [0016],[0080]) comprising an ultrasonic guided wave transducer 21 (e.g. angle transmission probe; paragraph [0066]) on a surface of a pipeline such that the transducer will transmit guided waves 16 (e.g. ultrasonic wave; paragraph [0068]) toward a weld at an angle that is not orthogonal to the weld and such that specular reflections 18 (e.g. diffracted wave; paragraph [0068]) from the weld do not return to the transducers but a defect (e.g. minute flaw; paragraphs [0011],[0061]) in the weld will return diffuse reflected waves to the transducers (e.g. paragraphs [0079],[0077],[0061],[0066],[0072] to [0080]); the ultrasonic guided waves emit the guided waves at a wavelength such that only defects smaller than the wavelength will reflect a signal back to the ultrasonic guided wave transducer (e.g. paragraphs [0011],[0079],[0077],[0025]). (See, paragraphs [0057] to [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have readily recognize the advantages and desirability of employing the ultrasonic guided waves emit the guided waves at a wavelength such that only defects smaller than the wavelength will reflect a signal back to the ultrasonic guided wave transducer as suggested by Fukutomi et al. to the system of Breon et al. to have the ability to enable thick test objects resolving small-sized internal defects with more accuracy to produce a sharper image with a high spatial resolution. (See, paragraphs [0061],[0080] of Fukutomi et al.).
With regards to claim 12, Ganin further discloses the ultrasonic guided wave transducers are EMATs (Electro Magnetic Acoustic Transducers). (See, paragraphs [0039],[0042]; Figures 3,7).
With regards to claim 13, Ganin further discloses the ultrasonic guided wave transducers are magnetostrictive transducers. (See, paragraphs [0004],[0035],[0047]).
With regards to claim 14, Ganin further discloses the ultrasonic guided wave transducers are Lorentz force transducers. (See, paragraph [0004],[0035],[0047]).
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3-6 and 9-14 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection and/or because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Helen C Kwok whose telephone number is (571)272-2197. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 7:30 to 4:00 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/HELEN C KWOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855