Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/027,956

WELDING MEASURING SYSTEM AND WELDING MEASURING METHOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 23, 2023
Examiner
WONG, ELTON K
Art Unit
3745
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Hitachi Construction Machinery Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
356 granted / 458 resolved
+7.7% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
490
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
42.7%
+2.7% vs TC avg
§102
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
§112
36.1%
-3.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 458 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claims 1-9 are currently pending. Claims 1-8 are allowed. Claim 9 is rejected. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 23, 2023 and May 17, 2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. 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. 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. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oshita et al. (JP 2013-091086 A), hereinafter Oshita, in view of Hsu et al. (US 2016/0267806 A1), hereinafter Hsu. A copy of Oshita was provided with the IDS of March 23, 2023. References to the text of Oshita will refer to the reference numbers set forth in the machine translation that has been provided with the copy. Regarding Claim 9, Figures 1-3 of Oshita teach a welding measuring method for measuring a welding phenomenon in manual arc welding (1 interacting with M) by moving a camera (2), the welding measuring method comprising: a step of adjusting a position of the camera (2) such that a welding start point is included in an angle of view of the camera (2) before the welding is started; a step of moving the camera (2) such that a position of an arc within an image photographed by the camera (2) continues to be displayed within a predetermined region within the image after the welding is started (paragraphs [0011-0012], note discussion of a torch camera, i.e. camera 2, monitoring the state of the arc). Paragraph [0016] notes manual welding. Paragraphs [0021, 0024] note the reference numerals in the figures. The camera (2) is attached to and moves with the welding torch (1) while monitoring the arc state, as such the camera is considered position of the camera is considered adjusted as claimed and the position of the arc is considered within the image, since the purpose of the torch camera (2) is to monitor the arc and the camera (2) follows the welding torch (1). Oshita is silent regarding a step of starting photographing by the camera before the welding is started; and a step of stopping moving the camera and continuing the photographing by the camera in a case where the arc disappears. However, doing so would have been obvious in view of Hsu. Figure 1 of Hsu teaches a method of welding with cameras (32) that monitors the weld [0078]. Figures 9A, 9B provide a block diagram of a method involving the camera. Hsu includes a step of starting photographing by the camera before the welding is started. This step in block (904) allows for ensuring sufficient image quality at the beginning of the weld operation, since it allows for calibration of the camera to occur [0070]. Hsu also includes a step of stopping moving the camera and continuing the photographing by the camera in a case where the arc disappears. The step of stopping is what happens when the operator decides to stop welding. In block (924) it is noted the processor communicates with the camera to compare the images with instructions to end welding [0033, 0181]. As such, the continual photographing is what provides data to which the processor uses to determine if it is appropriate to end camera operations. 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 method taught by Oshita with a step of starting photographing by the camera before the welding is started; and a step of stopping moving the camera and continuing the photographing by the camera in a case where the arc disappears as suggested by Hsu, to provide the benefits of improved image quality and data which allows the determination of if the transmission of images should be terminated. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-8 are allowed. Regarding Claim 1, the closest art of record, Oshita, teaches a welding measuring system (via torch camera 2) for measuring a welding phenomenon in manual arc welding [0011-0012]. Paragraph [0016] notes manual welding. Oshita does not expressly teach a first camera rail disposed along a welding line; a first camera movable on the first camera rail; a first camera driving device that drives the first camera; and a computer configured to sense a position of an arc within an image photographed by the first camera, and control the first camera driving device such that the first camera moves at a speed at which the position of the arc continues to be displayed within a predetermined region within the image photographed by the first camera as claimed. This is specific structure of the welding measuring system exemplified in the instant application, such as camera (2a) with camera rail (60) in Figure 5. Meanwhile, the motion of the camera (2) of Oshita, as exemplified in Figure 2, is due to the attachment with torch (1), as exemplified in Figure 1. Paragraphs [0075-0080] of the instant application note the camera rail disposed along the welding line (8a) allows the camera (2a) to follow the movement of the arc. This allows for photographing of the welding phenomenon while keeping the distance from the camera (2a) to the welding position and angle constant when the torch (7) moves. The art of record does not indicate it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify Oshita by placing the camera on a camera rail disposed along a welding line as required of the claim, since this is specific structure not contemplated by the prior art. Claims 2-8 subsequently depend upon Claim 1. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELTON K WONG whose telephone number is (408)918-7626. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00AM - 5:00PM PST. 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, Court Heinle can be reached at (571)270-3508. 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. /ELTON K WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 23, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600461
COVERING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR A PITCH LINK OF A HELICOPTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601282
TURBOFAN GAS TURBINE ENGINE WITH INNER RING REINFORCING STRUCTURE AND METHODS OF PRODUCING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595823
AIRCRAFT ENGINE WITH SQUEEZE FILM DAMPER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595743
BLADED TURBOMACHINE ASSEMBLY INCLUDING MEANS FOR LIMITING VIBRATIONS BETWEEN PLATFORMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12560096
STATOR PART HAVING A FIN, IN A TURBINE ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+19.3%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 458 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month