Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 5 and 12 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.
Claims 5 and 12 recite “and/or” 5 different times. While it is possible the claim may not be indefinite due to the multiple alternatives, it is not clear what applicant is claiming as their invention. It’s possible that only one embodiment is claimed, such as “the connection tool is used to apply an added layer.” However, there are a total of 120, or 720?, possible embodiments of the claim. It is not clear if each of the limitations between the and/or clauses may be used with each of the other limitations. Reciting claim 5 as a Markush group, as in “selected from one or more of the following”, would be more appropriate. However, it is suggested that applicant reconsider if all of these options are appropriate in the same group.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-10, 15-17, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Taylor (GB1537236) as cited by applicant.
Regarding claim 1, Taylor discloses, a method for joining ducts 3a, 3b, in particular two ducts 3a, 3b by joining respective circular ends of the outer walls of these ducts 3a, 3b by welding, and specifically discloses (see page 1, left column, line 15 to page 3, left column, line 13 and Figures 1-2): comprising the steps of: positioning two ducts 3a, 3b (i.e. Segments) with rounded ends (see the portion where the ducts 3a, 3b meet in Figure 1) next to each other, positioning adjacent to the circular ends of the two ducts 3a, 3b a first portion of the joining tool constituted by the body 1 and the plate 4, constituted by the semi-cylindrical element la and by the portion 4a, positioning the semi-cylindrical element 1 b and the second part of the portion 4b of the connection tool in such a way that: The first and second parts of the connection tool form the main body 1, i.e. The annular housing, blocking access to the rounded ends from the outside of the ducts 3a, 3b, and the outer walls of the ducts 3a, 3b are coupled by welding using a non-consumable tungsten pole 13 of the connection tool, i.e. The welding head, arranged inside the main body 1. Regarding claim 2, Fig 2 shows the first and second tools being connected by a hinge 5. Regarding claim 3, Fig 2 shows a track or worm wheel 9 around the device and the two parts, running parallel to the circular ends and positioning the welding head 11 to move around the track along the seam.
Regarding claim 6, Taylor discloses, (see paragraphs 13-23 of the description and the attached drawings) that using connecting tools to connect the structure, a plurality of clamping elements 7 are mounted in the circular openings 8 of each plate, these elements being elastically radially movable, which, in order to prevent the entry of air through the junction between the two semi-cylindrical elements la, lb of the main body 1, can be provided with seals. Wherein at least two pairs of sections have respective rounded ends of different diameters of the outer walls to be coupled, wherein the radial position of the seal and/or the welding head between the annular casing and the respective outer wall and/or of the equipment used in the or at least one of the additional processing steps is selected as a function of the diameter of the respective circular ends to be connected. Regarding claim 7, reducing the initial gap between the ends of the outer walls after positioning the two segments and/or the angle between the outer walls of the segments by actuating one actuator of the connection tool is a conventional arrangement in the art. Regarding claim 8, Figs show the connection tool being positioned using a wheeled or tracked transport 9. The remainder of the claim limitations are recited in the alternative and considered option.
Taylor discloses regarding claim 9, a connection tool, and specifically discloses (see page 1, left column, line 15 to page 3, left column, line 13 and Figures 1-2): connecting two tubular ducts 3a, 3b (i.e. Segments) for joining by welding respective rounded ends of the outer walls of these ducts 3a, 3b of the structure (see the portion where the ducts 3a, 3b meet in Figure 1), it comprises a first portion constituted by the semi-cylindrical element la and the portion 4a and a second portion constituted by the semi-cylindrical element lb and the portion 4b of the joining tool constituted by the body 1 and the plate 4, the first portion and the second portion each forming a length of the main body 1 (i.e. An annular housing), the first part and the second part being connected by means of a mechanism constituted by a hinge 5, to pivot the second part relative to the first part to open and close the main body 1, wherein, when the complete circumference of each axial end of the body 1 contacts the outer wall of a respective one of the ducts 3a, 3b, the closed body 1 blocks access from the outside of the ducts 3a, 3b to the rounded end, the non-consumable tungsten pole 13 (i.e. The welding head), the worm wheel 9 (corresponding to the track) extending along the body 1 when the body 1 is closed, and the motor (i.e. The actuator) for moving the non-consumable tungsten pole 13 along the worm wheel 9 to form the weld connecting the ducts 3a, 3b. Regarding claim 10, a plurality of clamping elements 7 are mounted in the circular opening 8 of each plate, these elements being elastically movable radially, which, in order to prevent the entry of air through the junction between the two semi-cylindrical elements la, lb of the main body 1, can be provided with a seal 15. Regarding claim 15, Figs show the connection tool being positioned using a wheeled or tracked transport 9 for adjusting the radial position. The remainder of the claim limitations are recited in the alternative and considered option. Regarding claims 16 and 17 as the wind turbine is constructed of sections of pipe this is considered an intended use of the method and apparatus.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 4, 11, 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor (GB1537236) in view of Yuzo et al. (JP58128285) as cited by applicant with references made to attached machine translation.
Taylor discloses, regarding claim 4, discloses (see paragraphs 13-23 of the specification and drawings) that an inert gas is supplied to the welding zone through channel 10 and tube 12. Further, based on additional technical features further defined in this claim, the technical problem that it actually solves is how to better control the welding conditions.
Taylor fails to disclose the temperature and/or humidity in the ring-shaped housing are modified by an environment control means of the connection tool, prior to joining of the outer walls by welding.
Yuzo discloses, a welding method and device and specifically discloses (see page 1 right column line 3 to page 4 right column line 3 and Figures 1-6) that the temperature is modified by the control device 42 (i.e. Environmental control device) before the round tube 10 is coupled by welding. It would have been obvious to adapt Taylor in view of Yuzo to provide the temperature modification for eliminating weld defects.
Regarding claims 16 and 17 as the wind turbine is constructed of sections of pipe it would have been obvious to use this device and method for welding a structure of a wind turbine.
Claim(s) 5, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor (GB1537236) in view of Tooth et al (US 2020/0001324).
The teachings of Taylor have been discussed above. Taylor fails to disclose, the connection tool is used to apply an added layer and/or to treat the outer surface of the walls, etc.
Tooth discloses, an assembly and a method for treating a pipe section of a pipe, and specifically discloses (see specification 3, paragraphs 131-158 and Figures 1-5): In a ring welding process, a metal pipe is butt welded together and next, a protective and insulating coating is applied to the weld area, additional layers are applied to and/or treated with the metal surface 4 of the pipe (i.e. The outer surface of the wall) and the weld and/or sensor data is collected regarding the metal surface 4 of the pipe and the weld and/or the additional layers. (See Paragraphs [0080]-[0090]) It would have been obvious to adapt Taylor in view of Tooth to provide treating the surface of the walls for preventing corrosion or acquiring sensor data for controlling the heating profile.
Tooth also discloses, a control system (i.e. A control unit) designed to control the respective apparatus in a respective additional processing step carried out after the welding step, the control system being designed to evaluate at least part of the sensor data. It would have been obvious to adapt Taylor in view of Tooth to provide the control unit being designed to control the actuator and the welding head to couple the outer walls by welding in a welding step, and controlling the respective equipment in respective additional processing steps carried out before the welding step and generating a report based on at least part of the evaluation sensor data acquiring sensor data for controlling the heating profile.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN W JENNISON whose telephone number is (571)270-5930. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-5.
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 at 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 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.
/BRIAN W JENNISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 9/8/2025