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 .
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 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.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 14-18 and 22-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colombo et al. (hereafter Colombo – IT BO20090496) in view of Horner-Richardson et al. (hereafter Horner-Richardson – US 20030034333).
Claim 14 recites “a plasma torch.” Colombo teaches such a plasma torch, as will be shown.
Colombo teaches (Figs. 2-3) a plasma torch comprising:
a first element 5 provided with a through opening for the exit of a plasma flow (see Fig. 2 and page 5, ln. 16-17);
a hollow electrode 6 which develops longitudinally along a main axis (Fig. 2) and can be positioned with respect to said first element in such a way as to define a striking area (7, see pg. 5, ln. 27-29), said hollow electrode being of the type comprising an inner cavity that extends at least partially along said main axis (Fig. 2);
a main conveyance way 16 suited to convey a carrier gas;
first dividing means (14a, 15a) suited to divide said main way into a first conveyance way 14 suited to convey a portion of said carrier gas from said main way 16 towards said striking area and a second conveyance way 15 suited to convey a portion of said carrier gas from said main way towards said inner cavity of said hollow electrode (pg. 7, ln. 14-19), said portion of said carrier gas of said second way being suited to cool down said hollow electrode, and the entirety of said portion of said carrier gas of said second way being conveyed from said inner cavity of said hollow electrode towards an outlet way 15B in such a way as not to affect said striking area (Fig. 3, pg. 8, ln. 14-20);
second dividing means 12 arranged downstream of said first dividing means and suited to divide said first way 14 into a third conveyance way V1 suited to convey a portion of said carrier gas from said first way towards said striking area and into a fourth conveyance way 27 suited to convey a portion of said carrier gas from said first way towards said first element, said portion of said carrier gas of said fourth way being suited to cool down said first element (pg. 11, ln. 10-13, Fig. 2);
a shield body cup 8 which supports said first element;
However, Colombo does not teach a shield provided with an opening coupled with the shield body cup; and a gap area defined between the shield and the first element.
Horner-Richardson teaches (Figs. 12) a plasma torch comprising a shield body cup 598 which supports a first element 531, a shield 539 provided with an opening coupled with the shield body cup (para. 0092); and a gap area 549 defined between the shield and the first element.
Horner-Richardson further teaches such a shield body cup and shield arrangement with a gap area between the shield and the first element will create additional turbulence in the hydrodynamic boundary layer of the cooling gas to further improve convective cooling of each consumable part (para. 0095).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of Horner-Richardson to the plasma torch of Colombo to have a shield provided with an opening coupled with the shield body cup; and a gap area defined between the shield and the first element, as both references and Applicant’s invention are directed to plasma torches. Doing so would result in additional turbulence in the hydrodynamic boundary layer of the cooling gas to further improve convective cooling of each consumable part, as recognized by Horner-Richardson.
Regarding Claim 15, Colombo, as modified with Horner-Richardson in Claim 14 above, teaches (Colombo Figs. 2-3) the plasma torch according to claim 14, wherein the outlet way conveys said carrier gas from said inner cavity of said hollow electrode in said second way towards the outside of said torch, in such a way as not to affect said striking area (Fig. 3, pg. 8, ln.14-20).
Regarding Claim 16, Colombo, as modified with Horner-Richardson in Claim 14 above, teaches (Colombo Figs. 2-3) the plasma torch according to claim 14, wherein said inner cavity of said hollow electrode substantially extends over the entire length of said hollow electrode (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 17, Colombo, as modified with Horner-Richardson in Claim 14 above, teaches (Colombo Figs. 2-3) the plasma torch according to claim 14, wherein said hollow electrode constitutes the cathode of said torch (pg. 5, ln. 21-23).
Regarding Claim 18, Colombo, as modified with Horner-Richardson in Claim 14 above, teaches (Colombo Figs. 2-3) the plasma torch according to claim 14, wherein said hollow electrode constitutes the cathode of said torch and said first element constitutes the anode of said torch (pg. 5, ln. 21-28).
Regarding Claim 22, Colombo, as modified with Horner-Richardson in Claim 14 above, teaches (Colombo Figs. 2-3) the plasma torch according to claim 14, wherein said hollow electrode is in a fixed position with respect to said first element (Fig. 2, 3).
Regarding Claim 23, Colombo, as modified with Horner-Richardson in Claim 14 above, teaches (Colombo Figs. 2-3) the plasma torch according to claim 14, further comprising power supply means for said hollow electrode (pg. 5, ln. 21-23).
Regarding Claim 24, Colombo, as modified with Horner-Richardson in Claim 14 above, teaches (Colombo Figs. 2-3) the plasma torch according to claim 14, further comprising power supply means for said first element (pg. 5, ln.21-23).
Regarding Claim 25, Colombo, as modified with Horner-Richardson in Claim 14 above, teaches (Colombo Figs. 2-3) a device for the generation of plasma comprising a plasma torch, wherein said plasma torch is made according to claim 14 (see rejection of claim 14 above).
Claim 26 recites a method of operating a plasma torch having the same features of Claim 14 which are rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colombo in view of Horner-Richardson, and further in view of Maocec (FR 2839606).
Regarding Claim 19, Colombo, as modified with Horner-Richardson in Claim 14 above, teaches (Colombo Figs. 2-3) the plasma torch according to claim 14.
However, modified Colombo does not teach said hollow electrode is movable and can be positioned between at least one first operating position and at least one second operating position, wherein in said first operating position said hollow electrode is in contact with said first element and in said second operating position said hollow electrode is spaced from said first element in such a way as to define said striking area.
Maocec teaches (Figs. 1, 2) a plasma torch comprising a hollow electrode 5 is movable and can be positioned between at least one first operating position and at least one second operating position (Figs. 1, 2), wherein in said first operating position said hollow electrode is in contact with said first element and in said second operating position said hollow electrode is spaced from said first element in such a way as to define said striking area (Figs. 1, 2, abstract).
Maocec further teaches such a moveable hollow electrode is for generating a spark between the electrode and nozzle (abstract).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of Maocec to the plasma torch of Colombo to have said hollow electrode is movable and can be positioned between at least one first operating position and at least one second operating position, wherein in said first operating position said hollow electrode is in contact with said first element and in said second operating position said hollow electrode is spaced from said first element in such a way as to define said striking area, as the references and Applicant’s invention are directed to plasma torches. Doing so would result in generating a spark between the electrode and nozzle, as recognized by Maocec.
Regarding Claim 20, Colombo, as modified with Horner-Richardson, and further in view of Maocec in Claim 19 above, teaches (Maocec Figs. 1-2) the plasma torch according to claim 19, further comprising moving means 9 to move said hollow electrode between said at least one first operating position and said at least one second operating position.
Regarding Claim 21, Colombo, as modified with Horner- Richardson, and further in view of Maocec in Claim 19 above, teaches (Maocec Figs. 1-2) the plasma torch according to claim 20, wherein said moving means comprise at least one supporting piston 9 suited to support said hollow electrode and elastic thrusting means suited to thrust said piston and to arrange said hollow electrode in said at least one first operating position.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW BUI whose telephone number is (571) 272-0685. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 AM - 4:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Courtney Heinle can be reached on (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 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).
/ANDREW THANH BUI/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/COURTNEY D HEINLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745