DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:” would with a metallic wire” should be amended to recite “wound with a metallic wire”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 11-14, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Singh et al. (US 2021/0046569).
With regard to claims 1 and 16, Singh describes a welding apparatus (FIG. 12 reproduced below), comprising a support (annotated FIG. 12 below); a base member (61, annotated FIG. 12 below) coupled with the support at a first end of the base member, the base member (61) extending from the support; an arm (62) coupled with the base member (61) at a second end of the base member, the arm extending from the base member to fit within an opening in a vessel (20); and a welding head (80) coupled with the arm (62), the welding head to weld a welding interface at an interior surface of the vessel (20) (FIG. 6).
PNG
media_image1.png
285
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 16, as the claim is directed toward a method of welding a remote object and includes the same limitations to that of claim 1 which is directed toward a welding apparatus, with the only difference to that of claim 1 being that claim 16 is drafted in method form, to the extent that the prior art apparatus meets the structural limitations of the apparatus as claimed, it will obviously perform the method steps as claimed. Furthermore, it has been held that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977); MPEP 2112.01(I)".
With regard to claims 2 and 17, Singh discloses the arm (62) rotatably coupled with the base member (61), the arm (62) to rotate about an axis that is misaligned with a longitudinal axis of the base member (61) to weld the welding interface of the vessel (“Distal arm 62 is vertically rotatable in a vertical plane with respect to the proximal arm 62 of the articulating arm assembly 60 and base 51/lid 30”, para. [0064]).
With regard to claim 3, Singh discloses the arm (62) rotatably coupled with the base member (61), the arm (62) to rotate about an axis that is aligned with a longitudinal axis of the base member (61) (“A third rotary joint 65 allows the distal arm 62 to rotate a full 360 degrees in either direction coaxial with respect to the longitudinal centerline axis Lc of the distal arm. Other arrangements of platters and rotary joints may be used.”, para. [0064]).
With regard to claims 5 and 18, Singh discloses a computing device (84) coupled with the arm, the computing device to capture an image of the welding interface while the welding head (80) is welding the welding interface (“camera 84 provides real-time images during the welding process to the controller 100, which in turn displays the images on a visual display 102 operably linked to the controller. Camera 84 is configured and constructed especially for use in harsh welding environments to monitor arc welding processes.”, para. [0071], FIG. 11).
With regard to claim 6, Singh discloses a computing device (84) rotatably coupled with the arm (62), the computing device (84) to ratable about an axis that is misaligned with a longitudinal axis of the arm to capture an image of the welding interface (para. [0071], [0073]: “Obtaining and using the geometric information about the actual weld joint measured via the touchless joint tracking sensor 83 and process by the main controller 100 may be approached in two ways. In a first “advanced mapping” approach, the PRW 50 rotates the articulating arm assembly 60 such that the touchless joint tracking sensor 83 circumnavigates the circumferential weld joint 37 one complete time or pass (without performing any welding). The sensor 83 scans and maps the geometric profile of entire weld joint as it travels along the joint, and then transmits the weld joint mapping information back to the main controller 100. The main controller is programmed (via software/control instructions) to develop and then implement the welding plan based on the joint mapping information. The welding plan when executed by controller 100 instructs the PRW 50 how many welding passes are to be made around the weld joint 37, and the size/dimensions and placement of the continuously formed weld beads associated with each pass until the weld joint is progressively filled by the weld material deposited by the welding wire 81 in each pass to complete the weld.”).
With regard to claim 11, Singh discloses a remote computing device (100) communicably coupled with a computing device (84), the remote computing device (100) to display an image of the welding interface captured by the computing device (84) (“The camera 84 provides real-time images during the welding process to the controller 100, which in turn displays the images on a visual display 102 operably linked to the controller.”, para. [0071].)
With regard to claim 12, Singh discloses a remote computing device (100) communicably coupled with the welding head (80), the remote computing device (100) to control the welding head to weld the welding interface (para. [0060]; [0071]; “automated welding operation steps include the main controller 100 first locating the weld joint with the touchless joint tracking sensor 83 of the vision system on the welding head 80 by moving the articulating arm assembly 60 from an inward folded retracted positioned seen in FIGS. 5A-B (used to transport and lift the PRW on top of the canister) to an outwardly extended position seen in FIGS. 11 and 13.”, para. [0094]).
With regard to claim 13, Singh discloses a remote computing device (100) communicably coupled with the arm (62), the remote computing device (100) to control a movement of the arm (62) about an axis that is misaligned with a longitudinal axis of the base member (“Servo drive motors include an encoder which provides closed-loop control which incorporates positional feedback information to the present welding process main controller 100. This allows the main controller to know the position and orientation of the articulating arm 60 segments at all times, thereby allowing the controller to control and control the movement of the various segments as necessary to achieve the desired motion and positioning of the robotic arm. Such servo drives and their closed loop feedback control are well known in the art without further elaboration necessary.”, para. [0060]).
With regard to claim 14, Singh teaches a feeder (70) the feeder to control a movement of a metallic wire (81) to the welding head (80) to control a rate of welding the welding interface (FIG. 3 illustrates that the feeder (70) is coupled with the support through the base member (61).
With regard to claim 20, Singh discloses a method of welding a remote object (20) comprising: receiving, via an arm (62) coupled with a base member (61, FIG. 12), the arm (62) extending from the base member (61) to fit within an opening (upper lid portion 30) in a vessel (20), a metallic wire (81); receiving, via a welding head (80) coupled with the arm (62), the metallic wire (81); and welding, via the metallic wire (81) received at the welding head (80), a welding interface at an interior surface of the vessel (20) (FIG. 11).
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.
Claims 4, 9, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh et al. (US 2021/0046569).
With regard to claim 4, Singh teaches the welding head (80) as claimed and as detailed above; however, although the citation does not teach explicitly that the welding head has a cross-sectional dimension of less than 8 inches, the welding head to fit within the opening in the vessel, it is submitted that such an adaptation would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art as an obvious change in size/proportion and/or an obvious change in shape (see MPEP 2144 IV. A. Changes in Size/Proportion and/or B. Changes in Shape) to adapt the subject limitation to be operable within a given environment.
With regard to claim 9, Singh teaches the arm (62) as claimed and as detailed above; however, although the citation does not teach explicitly that the arm having a cross-sectional dimension of less than 8 inches, the arm to fit within the opening of the vessel, it is submitted that such an adaptation would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art as an obvious change in size/proportion and/or an obvious change in shape (see MPEP 2144 IV. A. Changes in Size/Proportion and/or B. Changes in Shape) to adapt the subject limitation to be operable within a given environment.
With regard to claim 15, Singh teaches a spool (“spool”: “a continuous supply of welding wire 81 is fed to the welding head 81 during the welding process from a bulk wire supply spool or barrel”, para. [0066]) would with a metallic wire (81), the spool (“spool”) to facilitate movement of the metallic wire (81) through to the welding head (80). However, although the citation does not teach that the spool is coupled with the support, it is submitted that such an adaptation would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art as an obvious rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144 VI. C Rearrangement of Parts) as such an adaptation would have resulted in the spool operating in the same way/performing the same function, and/or such an adaptation would have been a matter of design choice as the exact position of the spool would not impact and/or change the function of the spool.
With regard to claim 19, Singh teaches the arm (62) as claimed and as detailed above; however, although the citation does not teach explicitly that, the arm having a cross-sectional dimension of less than 8 inches, the arm to fit within the opening of the vessel, it is submitted that such an adaptation would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art as an obvious change in size/proportion and/or an obvious change in shape (see MPEP 2144 IV. A. Changes in Size/Proportion and/or B. Changes in Shape) to adapt the subject limitation to be operable within a given environment.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh et al. (US 2021/0046569) in view of Han (KR102020149)
With regard to claim 7, Singh teaches the invention as claimed; however, Singh does not teach the base member having a first component and a second component, the first component movably coupled with the second component, the first component to extend from the second component along a longitudinal axis of the base member in a first direction and the first component to retract toward the second component along the longitudinal axis of the base member in a second direction. However, Han which is directed toward the same field of endeavor of a telescoping 6-axis vertical articulated robot arm and/or problem to be solved of a robotic arm having an extension function to provide for enhanced positional/directional movement teaches the aforementioned limitation of a first component (560, FIG. 6) movable coupled to a first component (510) with the first component (560) extending from the second component (510, FIG. 6) along a longitudinal axis of the base member (500) in a first direction (illustrated by arrows in FIG. 6) and the first component (560) to retract toward the second component (illustrated by arrows in FIG. 6) along the longitudinal axis of the base member in a second direction (arrow in FIG. 6 pointing to right is a first direction and arrow pointing to left is second direction with regard to base member 500 of FIG. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device in the Singh reference, to include the base member having a first component and a second component, the first component movably coupled with the second component, the first component to extend from the second component along a longitudinal axis of the base member in a first direction and the first component to retract toward the second component along the longitudinal axis of the base member in a second direction, as suggested and taught by Han, for the purpose of providing selective expansion and contraction of the robot arm within a work area to perform a variety of tasks with one robot (Han: pg. 3, ln. 3-4).
With regard to claim 8, Han teaches the base member (500) to move between an expanded position and a retracted position (FIG. 6 illustrates movement between expanded and extracted via respective arrows of base member 500), the base member having a first length in the expanded position and the base member having a second length in the retracted position (FIG. 6). With regard to the limitation of the first length and the second length having a ratio of 3:1, as the subject structural limitation is taught by Han with first and second components (510/560) of the base member 500, the limitation of the ratio of 3:1 would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art as a matter of routine experimentation to achieve a desired retracted position to achieve a desired operation.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh et al. (US 2021/0046569) in view of Wuxi (CN 216829247).
With regard to claim 10, Singh teaches the invention as claimed; however, the citation does not teach the limitation of a base coupled with the support, the base movable in a first direction along a first axis and movable in a second direction along a second axis, the first axis misaligned with the second axis. However, Wuxi directed toward the same field of endeavor of a portable moving base of a handheld laser welding machine teaches a base (12/13; FIG. 1) coupled with the support (9), the base (12/13) movable in a first direction along a first axis and movable in a second direction along a second axis, the first axis misaligned with the second axis (FIG. 1 illustrates slide rails 12 with a movable plate 9 having sliders 10 movable upon slide rails 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device in the Singh reference, to include a base coupled with the support, the base movable in a first direction along a first axis and movable in a second direction along a second axis, the first axis misaligned with the second axis, as suggested and taught by Wuxi, for the purpose of providing the laser device with convenient horizontal and bi-directional adjustment and movement (Wuxi: pg. 2, ln. 26-29).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH W ISKRA whose telephone number is (313) 446-4866. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 09:00-17:00 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, 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.
/JOSEPH W ISKRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761