DETAILED ACTION
This Detailed Action replaces the previous Detailed Action dated March 25, 2026.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 25, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3, 6, 11-21, 23-28 and 30-33 have been considered but are moot 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.
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.
Claims 14-21, 23 and 24 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.
Regarding claim 14, the wording of “two of the helical piles” in line 7 is confusing. The helical piles are previously recited as “one or more helical piles” in line 1. How can there be “two of the helical piles” in the case of the “one or more helical piles” being just one helical pile? Examiner interprets the claim to require two or more helical piles and suggests changing “one or more helical piles” to “two or more helical piles” throughout the claim. Claims 15 and 24 are rejecting for depending from a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 16, it is unclear whether “the at least two helical piles” in line 4 (and repeated in line 5 and claim 23) are the same as or different than “two or more helical piles” in lines 1-2 because of the similar but different terminology. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “the at least two helical piles” to mean “the two or more helical piles”. Claims 17-21 and 23 are rejecting for depending from a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 18, it is unclear whether “motors” in line 2 are the same as or different than, and in addition to, “a drive motor” in claim 1 because of the double positive recitation of “motor”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “motors” to mean “the drive motor”.
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 1-3, 6, 11-21, 23-27 and 30-33 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meggitt et al (US 2014/0161538) in view of Talbert et al (US 2016/0348332).
Regarding claim 1, Meggitt discloses an installation tool (e.g. 128, Fig. 4) for installing a group anchor system (e.g. 110, Fig. 4), wherein the group anchor system comprises: at least two piles (e.g. 116, Fig. 4); and a template (e.g. 112, Fig. 4), wherein the template defines an aperture for a shaft of each of the at least two piles allowing each shaft to pass therethrough and to be secured therein (e.g. Fig. 4, paragraph 0036); the installation tool removably attachable to the template and configured to install the at least two piles and the template into ground (e.g. Fig. 4, paragraph 0036), the installation tool comprising: a plurality of installation modules (e.g. an installation module on either side of 128, Fig. 4, paragraph 0036), wherein each installation module is configured to install a pile of the at least two piles (e.g. Fig. 4, paragraph 0036); and wherein the installation tool is configured to disconnect from the at least two piles and the template responsive to installation of the at least two piles (e.g. paragraph 0036). Meggitt does not explicitly disclose a drive motor to insert or remove the piles. Since Applicant did not traverse the official notice taken in a previous office action, it is taken as admitted prior art that motors are notoriously well known in the art. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a motor to drive the piles of Meggitt because such is a known power source in the art that is capable of providing driving force and being controllable as intended by Meggitt (e.g. paragraph 0035). Meggitt further discloses that any drill may be employed (e.g. paragraph 0033) but does not disclose that each installation module comprises a drive head to rotate the shaft of the pile. Talbert teaches an installation tool (e.g. 120-140, Fig. 11) for installing a group anchor system (e.g. 100, Fig.’s 1 and 11), wherein the group anchor system comprises: at least two helical piles (e.g. 10A and 10B, Fig. 1); and a template (e.g. 110, Fig. 11), wherein the template defines an aperture for a shaft of each of the at least two helical piles allowing each shaft to pass therethrough and to be secured therein (e.g. 112, Fig. 11); the installation tool comprising: a plurality of installation modules (e.g. 130A and 130B, Fig. 5A, paragraph 0090), wherein each installation module is configured to install a helical pile of the at least two helical piles (e.g. paragraph 0090) and comprises: a drive head to rotate the shaft of the helical pile (e.g. 140/141, Fig. 14, paragraph 0119); and a drive for driving the drive head to insert or remove the helical pile (e.g. paragraphs 0060, 0090 and 0119 wherein a drive is required to provide the disclosed rotation). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a drive head as taught by Talbert for the drill of Meggitt because such is a known drill in the art that would provide the expected benefit of providing both the rotation and axial force required to insert a pile into a seafloor (e.g. paragraphs 0117-0118).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that each installation module comprises: a linear guide rail (e.g. Meggitt, center of 128, Fig. 4, and Talbert, 120, Fig.’s 5A and 11); wherein each installation module of the plurality of installation modules comprises a driver platform configured to engage the linear guide rail for movement thereon (e.g. Talbert, lower portion of 130, Fig.’s 5A, 5B and 14).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that each installation module comprises a roller based drive system (e.g. Talbert, Fig. 14 wherein 141 is considered roller based because of its rotation).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that the installation tool is adapted for subsea use (e.g. Meggitt, claim 1, and Talbert, claim 57).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that the installation tool is adapted for driving one or more helical piles that are rigid piles, wherein each rigid pile has a plurality of lugs along its length for mating with the drive head such that the rigid pile is driven from a point along its length (e.g. Talbert, similar to piles 10A and 10B, Fig. 1, and similar to lugs 19, Fig. 14, paragraph 0119, wherein Examiner notes that the piles and lugs are not positively recited).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that the plurality of installation modules comprises 2-100 installation modules, inclusive, arranged in a predetermined pattern with respect to each other and each corresponding to a location of a helical pile to be driven (e.g. Meggitt, 2 installation modules, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses a control system permitting manual, semi-automatic, or automatic driving of each installation module independently or simultaneously (e.g. Meggitt, paragraph 0036).
Regarding claim 14, Meggitt discloses a system (e.g. 110, Fig. 4) for installation of one or more piles (e.g. 116, Fig. 4), the system comprising: a template (e.g. 112, Fig. 4), wherein the template defines an aperture for each of the one or more piles allowing each of the one or more piles to pass therethrough and to be secured therein (e.g. Fig. 4, paragraph 0036); an installation tool removably attachable to the template and configured to install at least two of the piles and the template into ground (e.g. 128, Fig. 4, paragraph 0036), the installation tool comprising: a plurality of installation modules (e.g. an installation module on either side of 128, Fig. 4, paragraph 0036), wherein each installation module is configured to install a pile of the one or more piles (e.g. Fig. 4, paragraph 0036); wherein the installation tool is configured to: anchor the template by installing the one or more piles (e.g. paragraph 0036); and disconnect from the template (e.g. paragraph 0036). Meggitt does not explicitly disclose a drive motor to insert or remove the piles. Since Applicant did not traverse the official notice taken in a previous office action, it is taken as admitted prior art that motors are notoriously well known in the art. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a motor to drive the piles of Meggitt because such is a known power source in the art that is capable of providing driving force and being controllable as intended by Meggitt (e.g. paragraph 0035). Meggitt further discloses that any drill may be employed (e.g. paragraph 0033) but does not disclose that each installation module comprises a drive head to rotate a shaft of the pile. Talbert teaches a system (e.g. 100, Fig.’s 1 and 11) for installation of one or more helical piles (e.g. 10A and 10B, Fig. 1), the system comprising: a template (e.g. 110, Fig. 11), wherein the template defines an aperture for each of the one or more helical piles allowing each of the one or more helical piles to pass therethrough and to be secured therein (e.g. 112, Fig. 11); an installation tool configured to install at least two of the helical piles and the template into ground (e.g. 120-140, Fig. 11, paragraph 0090), the installation tool comprising: a plurality of installation modules (e.g. 130A and 130B, Fig. 5A, paragraph 0090), wherein each installation module is configured to install a helical pile of the one or more helical piles (e.g. paragraph 0090) and comprises: a drive head to rotate a shaft of the helical pile (e.g. 140/141, Fig. 14, paragraph 0119); and a drive for driving the drive head to insert or remove the helical pile (e.g. paragraphs 0060, 0090 and 0119 wherein a drive is required to provide the disclosed rotation). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a drive head as taught by Talbert for the drill of Meggitt because such is a known drill in the art that would provide the expected benefit of providing both the rotation and axial force required to insert a pile into a seafloor (e.g. paragraphs 0117-0118).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses a skirt fixed to a perimeter of the template and extending therefrom towards the ground (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4, wherein the top surface of 112 is considered the template and the exterior side surface of 112 is considered the skirt); and wherein the installation tool is configured to embed the skirt into the ground (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4, similar to paragraph 0033, wherein the installation module is capable of embedding the skirt at least partially by drilling of the piles).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert discloses a method of installing a group anchor system (e.g. Meggitt, 110, Fig. 4) comprising two or more piles (e.g. Meggitt, 116, Fig. 4), the method comprising: providing the installation tool of claim 1 (e.g. Meggitt, paragraph 0036, as explained above); installing, using the installation tool, the at least two piles into the ground (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4, paragraph 0036), wherein installation of the at least two piles occurs subsea (e.g. Meggitt, claim 1). The combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that the subsea location is available in different depths of water (e.g. Meggitt, paragraph 0025) but does not explicitly disclose that the subsea location is at deep ocean depth. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to install the group anchor system of the combination of Meggitt and Talbert at deep ocean depth for the expected benefit of anchoring oil rigs located in the deep ocean. Meggitt also does not disclose that the piles are helical piles. Talbert further teaches that the piles are helical piles (e.g. Talbert, 10A and 10B, Fig. 1, paragraph 0038). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use helical piles as taught by Talbert for the piles of Meggitt because such is a known pile for subsea use that would provide the expected benefit of balanced insertion resulting in reduced net torque on the apparatus (e.g. Talbert, paragraph 0044).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that the two or more helical piles are in a group configuration (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses providing, using motors attached to the drive head of at least an installation module of the plurality of installation modules, downward force on one of the helical piles (e.g. Meggitt, as described above, and Talbert, Fig. 14, paragraph 0117); and monitoring, using at least a sensor, the at least an installation module (e.g. Meggitt, paragraph 0035, and Talbert, paragraph 0063).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that installing the piles into the ground is at intermediate points of the piles (e.g. Talbert, Fig. 14, paragraph 0119), and installing comprises an automated installation process (e.g. Meggitt, claim 4, and Talbert, paragraphs 0063-0069).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that installing the piles into the ground is at intermediate points of the piles (e.g. Talbert, Fig. 14, paragraph 0119) but does not disclose that installing comprises a user-controlled installation process. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to allow user control of the installation process of the combination of Meggitt and Talbert for the expected benefit of allowing users to adjust or stop the process as needed.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses operating each installation module of the plurality of installation modules simultaneously or independently, or in a group to facilitate leveling of the group anchor system (e.g. Meggitt, paragraph 0036, and Talbert, paragraph 0038).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that installing the at least two helical piles includes controlling pile rotation and vertical motion (e.g. Talbert, Fig. 14, paragraphs 0117 and 0119).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses a skirt fixed to a perimeter of the template and projecting toward the ground from the template (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4, wherein the top surface of 112 is considered the template and the exterior side surface of 112 is considered the skirt); wherein driving the helical piles into the ground pulls the system, including the template and the skirt, into the ground to a desired depth, angle, and position (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4, similar to paragraph 0033, wherein the installation module is capable of driving the system into the ground by driving the piles); wherein the system provides for withdrawing the helical piles to leave the template and the skirt in place (e.g. Talbert, paragraph 0060 wherein reverse rotation allows withdrawal of the helical pile).
Regarding claim 25, Meggitt discloses a group anchor system (e.g. 110, Fig. 4) comprising: a plurality of piles (e.g. 116, Fig. 4); a plurality of installation modules (e.g. an installation module on either side of 128, Fig. 4, paragraph 0036), wherein each installation module is configured to install a pile of the plurality of piles (e.g. paragraph 0036); a template (e.g. 112, Fig. 4), wherein the template defines an aperture for each of the plurality of piles allowing the pile to pass therethrough and to be secured therein (e.g. Fig. 4, paragraph 0036); a mooring connection (e.g. not shown in Fig. 4, similar to 18, Fig. 1, paragraph 0032); and wherein at least an installation module of the plurality of installation modules is configured to: anchor the template by installing at least a pile of the plurality of piles (e.g. Fig. 4, paragraph 0036); and disconnect from the template (e.g. paragraph 0036). Meggitt does not explicitly disclose a drive motor to insert or remove the piles. Since Applicant did not traverse the official notice taken in a previous office action, it is taken as admitted prior art that motors are notoriously well known in the art. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a motor to drive the piles of Meggitt because such is a known power source in the art that is capable of providing driving force and being controllable as intended by Meggitt (e.g. paragraph 0035). Meggitt further discloses that any drill may be employed (e.g. paragraph 0033) but does not disclose that each installation module comprises a drive head to rotate a shaft of the pile, or that the piles are helical piles. Talbert teaches a group anchor system (e.g. 100, Fig.’s 1 and 11) comprising: a plurality of helical piles (e.g. 10A and 10B, Fig. 1); a plurality of installation modules (e.g. 130A and 130B, Fig. 5A, paragraph 0090), wherein each installation module is configured to install a helical pile of the plurality of helical piles (e.g. paragraph 0090) and comprises: a drive head to rotate a shaft of the helical pile (e.g. 140/141, Fig. 14, paragraph 0119); and a drive for driving the drive head to insert or remove the helical pile (e.g. paragraphs 0060, 0090 and 0119 wherein a drive is required to provide the disclosed rotation); and a template (e.g. 110, Fig. 11), wherein the template defines an aperture for each of the plurality of piles allowing the pile to pass therethrough and to be secured therein (e.g. 112, Fig. 11). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a drive head as taught by Talbert for the drill of Meggitt because such is a known drill in the art that would provide the expected benefit of providing both the rotation and axial force required to insert a pile into a seafloor (e.g. paragraphs 0117-0118), and to use helical piles as taught by Talbert for the piles of Meggitt because such is a known pile for subsea use that would provide the expected benefit of balanced insertion resulting in reduced net torque on the apparatus (e.g. paragraph 0044).
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses a skirt fixed to a perimeter of the template and extending therefrom towards a ground (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4, wherein the top surface of 112 is considered the template and the exterior side surface of 112 is considered the skirt); and wherein the at least an installation module is further configured to embed the skirt into the ground using the installed at least a helical pile (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4, similar to paragraph 0033, wherein the installation module is capable of driving the skirt into the ground by driving the piles).
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that the skirt extends either perpendicularly, or at an outward angle from the template (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses a load distribution system for distributing the loads from the helical piles across the group anchor system (e.g. Meggitt, interior beams of 112, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 31, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that the group anchor system further comprises a skirt fixed to a perimeter of the template and extending therefrom towards the ground (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4, wherein the top surface of 112 is considered the template and the exterior side surface of 112 is considered the skirt); and wherein the installation tool is configured to embed the skirt into the ground using the at least two helical piles (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4, similar to paragraph 0033, wherein the installation module is capable of driving the skirt into the ground by driving the piles). Further, Examiner notes that the skirt is not positively recited since it belongs to the group anchor system recited in the preamble of claim 1, and the installation tool of the combination of Meggitt and Talbert is capable of installing a template that includes a skirt.
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that the skirt extends either perpendicularly, or at an outward angle from the template (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 33, the combination of Meggitt and Talbert further discloses that the skirt is configured to resist lateral load components acting on the template (e.g. Meggitt, Fig. 4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 28 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STACY N LAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7515. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-3pm.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571-270-5281. 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.
/S.N.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3678
/AMBER R ANDERSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights