DETAILED ACTION
This is the First Office Action on the Merits and is directed towards claims 1-20 as originally presented and filed on 02/20/2023.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
No Apparent Priority is claimed accordingly the earliest filing date is 02/20/2023 (20230220).
The present application filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609 [R-07.2022], Applicant's 02/22/2023 AND 08/04/2023 submission(s) of Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)(s) is/are acknowledged by the Examiner and the reference(s) cited therein has/have been considered in the examination of the claim(s) now pending. A copy of the submitted IDS(s) initialed and dated by the Examiner is/are attached to the instant Office action.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 113530477 A TO ZHU, Ke et al. (hereinafter ZHU).
Regarding claim 1 ZHU teaches in for example the Figure(s) reproduced immediately below:
PNG
media_image1.png
767
593
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
700
609
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
647
356
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
654
425
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
443
534
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
594
445
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
444
624
media_image7.png
Greyscale
and associated descriptive texts a handler for handling a cylindrical object having a central axis (given the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) a Person of Ordinary Skill In the Art (POSITA) would as see a handler shown in the figures above handling oil pipe 4),
the handler having at least one clamp (connotes the “pipe rod gripping device” shown in the figures above),
the clamp comprising:
a mounting plate (connotes base 1 in the following citation:
“As shown in FIG. 1, the grabbing device of the invention comprises a base 1, a synchronous mechanism 2, a grabbing mechanism 3. Reference numeral 4 shows the oil pumping pipe that is grasped in this embodiment. Specifically, the gripping mechanism 3 is driven by the driving mechanism 5 of the hydraulic oil cylinder, and the gripping mechanism 3 comprises a plurality of claw groups. When the sucker rod, the oil pumping pipe is in place, the driving mechanism works, so as to drive each claw group in the grabbing mechanism 3 is opened or closed, each claw group finishes the grabbing or releasing of the pipe rod. As shown in FIG. 1, the driving mechanism is connected with each claw group, such as through a push rod; the end of the driving mechanism is connected with one end of the push rod; the other end of the push rod is connected with the claw group.”);
a piston assembly coupled to the mounting plate (given the BRI connotes driving mechanism 5 shown in Figs. 1 and 3 above as extended and retracted respectively);
a central plane of the clamp, the central plane oriented substantially orthogonal to a central axis of the cylindrical object (is shown in the figures above);
a plurality of outer tongs and inner tongs pivotally coupled to the mounting plate (given the BRI and also known to a POSITA as “JAWS” and “CLAWS” connotes items 311 and 312 respectively shown in for example only figs .7 and 8 as explained in for example:
“Referring again to FIG. 7, which shows the main view of the gripping mechanism 3. In FIG. 7, the emphasis is described for the first jaw group 31. As can be seen from FIG. 7, the first jaw group 31 comprises a first jaw 311 and a second jaw 312. the first claw 311 comprises a directly connected with the pipe rod contact the grasping part, for connecting with the rotating shaft 313 of the rotating shaft connection part, a driving connection part 314 for connecting with the driving mechanism and a connecting rod connection part 315 connected with the connecting rod 316. the second claw 312 comprises a directly connected with the pipe rod contact the grabbing part, for connecting with the rotating shaft 317 rotating shaft connection part and connected with the connecting part 318 connected with the connecting rod 316.”),
the outer tongs including first pairs of outer tongs spaced apart on separate sides of the central plane (given the BRI connotes items 31 and 33 as shown in Fig. 8 above and explained in for example :
“As can be seen from FIG. 8, the structure of the third jaw group 33 and the structure of the first jaw group 31 are the same, but after the mounting, the first jaw group 31 and the third jaw group 33 relative to the plane of the two are symmetrical. That is, arranged from the view direction in FIG. 7, the first claw group 31 of the second claw 312, the first claw group 31 of the first claw 311, the third claw group 33 of the first claw, the third claw group 33 of the second claw. or, after mounting, the first claw group 31 and the third claw group 33 of the two first claw is located at the inner side of the two second claw.
It can be seen from FIG. 8, the first claw group 31 and the third claw group 33 of the first claw of the driving connection part are connected together through the same pivot, so that the two can be driven at the same time.”),
the inner tongs including second pairs of inner tongs spaced apart on the separate sides of the central plane (as best shown in Fig. 8 above, inner tongs/jaws 312);
a plurality of linkage bars pivotally coupled between the piston assembly and the plurality of outer tongs and inner tongs (as shown in for example Figs. 1, 2, 3, 6 and 7 there are a plurality of linkage bars shown and especially in Fig. 7 wherein it is understood that a POSITA recognizes connecting rod 316 as a “linkage bar” as claimed);
and wherein, in response to a movement of the piston assembly, the inner and outer tongs pivot between an open position, to receive the cylindrical object between the inner and outer tongs (as shown in for example Figs. 3 and 5-9 above):
and a closed position, to secure the cylindrical object between the inner and outer tongs to facilitate handling of the cylindrical object by the handler (as shown in for example Figs. 1 and 2:
“FIG. 2 shows the state of the grabbing device of the embodiment of FIG. 1 when gripping the sucker rod with small diameter. As can be seen from FIG. 2, through the hydraulic oil cylinder with different length extending, the pair of claws of each claw group can be closer, so as to grab the sucker rod with smaller diameter.”).
Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are NOT imported into the claims. The Examiner must give the claim language the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) the claims allow.
See MPEP 2111.01 Plain Meaning [R-10.2024], which states
II. IT IS IMPROPER TO IMPORT CLAIM LIMITATIONS FROM THE SPECIFICATION
"Though understanding the claim language may be aided by explanations contained in the written description, it is important not to import into a claim limitations that are not part of the claim. For example, a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment." Superguide Corp. v. DirecTV Enterprises, Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 875, 69 USPQ2d 1865, 1868 (Fed. Cir. 2004). See also Liebel-Flarsheim Co. v. Medrad Inc., 358 F.3d 898, 906, 69 USPQ2d 1801, 1807 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (discussing recent cases wherein the court expressly rejected the contention that if a patent describes only a single embodiment, the claims of the patent must be construed as being limited to that embodiment); E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 1369, 67 USPQ2d 1947, 1950 (Fed. Cir. 2003) ("Inter US-20100280751-A1 1pretation of descriptive statements in a patent’s written description is a difficult task, as an inherent tension exists as to whether a statement is a clear lexicographic definition or a description of a preferred embodiment. The problem is to interpret claims ‘in view of the specification’ without unnecessarily importing limitations from the specification into the claims."); Altiris Inc. v. Symantec Corp., 318 F.3d 1363, 1371, 65 USPQ2d 1865, 1869-70 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (Although the specification discussed only a single embodiment, the court held that it was improper to read a specific order of steps into method claims where, as a matter of logic or grammar, the language of the method claims did not impose a specific order on the performance of the method steps, and the specification did not directly or implicitly require a particular order). See also subsection IV., below. When an element is claimed using language falling under the scope of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 6th paragraph (often broadly referred to as means- (or step-) plus- function language), the specification must be consulted to determine the structure, material, or acts corresponding to the function recited in the claim, and the claimed element is construed as limited to the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. In re Donaldson, 16 F.3d 1189, 29 USPQ2d 1845 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (see MPEP § 2181- MPEP § 2186).
In Zletz, supra, the examiner and the Board had interpreted claims reading "normally solid polypropylene" and "normally solid polypropylene having a crystalline polypropylene content" as being limited to "normally solid linear high homopolymers of propylene which have a crystalline polypropylene content." The court ruled that limitations, not present in the claims, were improperly imported from the specification. See also In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 799, 802, 218 USPQ 289, 292 (Fed. Cir. 1983) ("'[C]laims are not to be read in a vacuum, and limitations therein are to be interpreted in light of the specification in giving them their ‘broadest reasonable interpretation.'" (quoting In re Okuzawa, 537 F.2d 545, 548, 190 USPQ 464, 466 (CCPA 1976)). The court looked to the specification to construe "essentially free of alkali metal" as including unavoidable levels of impurities but no more.).”
Regarding claim 2 and the limitation the handler of claim 1, wherein a distance between the spaced apart pairs of outer tongs is at least 2 inches (see the following citation wherein it is understood that 2 inches is approximately 50mm:
“Specifically, in order to detect whether it is in the clamping state, can through the pressure sensor to detect whether the pressure in the hydraulic oil cylinder reaches a predetermined set to judge. and for the component size of the gripping device, it can be specifically designed according to the diameter of the grasped pipe rod. According to a specific embodiment, when grasping the diameter of the tube 16-89mm, the size of the connecting rod 316 can be 240mm, the distance between the central line of the rotating shaft 313 and the rotating shaft 317 is 260mm; the size of the connecting rod connected with the plunger rod and the claw group is 290mm, correspondingly, the plunger rod is formed between the 71-97mm of different pipe rod. Of course, the above size is only a specific size design mode. Those skilled in the art can obtain other feasible sizes by calculating.”).
Regarding claim 3 and the limitation the handler of claim 1, wherein a bushing is disposed between the spaced part pairs of outer tongs (see Fig. 8 wherein it appears bushings are used to obtain the spacing of the various components as indicate in the marked up version of fig. 8 immediately below).
PNG
media_image8.png
602
427
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4 and the limitation the handler of claim 1, wherein the clamp is configured to handle a pipe having a length in a range between 6 and 20 feet (given the BRI it is considered that a POSITA would understand that the clamp shown in the figures above is inherently capable if being used in the manner intended as it is known that oil pipe comes in different lengths depending on the oil field operation and the type of well being drilled:
“The invention belongs to the field of well repairing machine, specifically relates to a pipe rod grabbing device suitable for multiple pipe rod diameter specifications.”).
Regarding claim 5 and the limitation the handler of claim 1, wherein the clamp is configured to be positioned in the closed position, the clamp further comprises:
a center point coaxial with a projection of a central longitudinal axis of a grasped cylindrical object in the closed position of the clamp, wherein segments of projections intersecting at the center point and orthogonal to contact surfaces of the outer and inner tongs grasping the cylindrical object are substantially equidistant (given the BRI connotes what is shown in figures 1 and 2 above, see the comparison of Fig.1 and 2 with Fig. 8B of the instant application immediately below).
PNG
media_image1.png
767
593
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
686
1020
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6 and the limitation the handler of claim 1, wherein the clamp positioned in the closed position, the clamp further comprises:
a center point coaxial with a projection of a central longitudinal axis of a grasped cylindrical object in the closed position of the clamp, wherein segments of projections intersecting at the center point and orthogonal to contact surfaces of the outer and inner tongs gripping the cylindrical object form angles between the segments that are not substantially equal to 180 degrees (given the BRI connotes what is shown in figures 1 and 2 as discussed immediately above).
Regarding claim 7 and the limitation the handler of claim 1, wherein the clamp is configured to handle the cylindrical object having an outer diameter in a range between 3.692 inches and 20 inches ( “Those skilled in the art can obtain other feasible sizes by calculating “ it is understood that 3.692 inch is approximately 93 mm and 20 inches is approximately 508 mm which is anticipated by the following citations:
“Specifically, in order to detect whether it is in the clamping state, can through the pressure sensor to detect whether the pressure in the hydraulic oil cylinder reaches a predetermined set to judge. and for the component size of the gripping device, it can be specifically designed according to the diameter of the grasped pipe rod. According to a specific embodiment, when grasping the diameter of the tube 16-89mm, the size of the connecting rod 316 can be 240mm, the distance between the central line of the rotating shaft 313 and the rotating shaft 317 is 260mm; the size of the connecting rod connected with the plunger rod and the claw group is 290mm, correspondingly, the plunger rod is formed between the 71-97mm of different pipe rod. Of course, the above size is only a specific size design mode. Those skilled in the art can obtain other feasible sizes by calculating.”).
Regarding claim 8 and the limitation the handler of claim 1, wherein the outer and inner tongs of the clamp further comprise arcuate surfaces for grasping an object (given the BRI connotes what is shown in the figures above and annotated Fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image10.png
462
589
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9 and the limitation a handler for handling cylindrical objects having central axes, the handler having a plurality of clamps, the each clamp comprising:
a mounting plate; a piston assembly coupled to the mounting plate;
a central plane of the clamp substantially orthogonal to the central axes of the cylindrical objects;
a plurality of outer tongs and inner tongs pivotally coupled to the mounting plate, the outer tongs including first pairs of outer tongs spaced apart on separate sides of the central plane, the inner tongs including second pairs of inner tongs spaced apart on the separate sides of the central plane;
and a plurality of linkage bars pivotally coupled between the piston assembly and the plurality of outer tongs and inner tongs; wherein, in response to a movement of the piston assembly of a first clamp, the inner and outer tongs of the first clamp pivot between an open position and a closed position of the first clamp and wherein, in response to a movement of the piston assembly of a second clamp,
the inner and outer tongs of the second clamp pivot between an open position and a closed position of the second clamp, such that the first and second clamps simultaneously and concentrically handle the first cylindrical object having a first diameter and the second cylindrical object having a second diameter (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 1 above incorporated herein by reference wherein Figs. 1 and 2 clearly show the claimed limitations).
Regarding claim 10 and the limitation the handler of claim 9, wherein a distance between the spaced apart pairs of outer tongs is at least 2 inches (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 2 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 11 and the limitation the handler of claim 10, further comprising a bushing extending between the spaced apart pairs of outer tongs (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 3 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 12 and the limitation the handler of claim 9, wherein the clamp is configured to handle a pipe having a length in a range between 6 and 20 feet (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 4 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 13 and the limitation the handler of claim 9, wherein the clamp positioned in the closed position, the clamp further comprising: a center point coaxial with a projection of a central longitudinal axis of a grasped cylindrical object in the closed position of the clamp, wherein segments of projections intersecting at the center point and orthogonal to contact surfaces of the outer and inner tongs grasping the cylindrical object are substantially equidistant (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 5 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 14 and the limitation the handler of claim 9, wherein the clamp positioned in the closed position, the clamp further comprising: a center point coaxial with a projection of a central longitudinal axis of a grasped cylindrical object in the closed position of the clamp, wherein segments of projections intersecting at the center point and orthogonal to contact surfaces of the outer and inner tongs gripping the cylindrical object form angles between the segments that are not substantially equal to 180 degrees (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 6 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 15 and the limitation the handler of claim 9, wherein the clamp is configured to handle the cylindrical object having an outer diameter in a range between 3.692 inches and 20 inches (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 7 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 16 and the limitation the handler of claim 9, wherein the outer and inner tongs of the clamp further comprise arcuate surfaces for grasping an object and wherein a tolerance for machining the arcuate surfaces is in a range between 0.001 and 0.010 inches (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 8 above incorporated herein by reference wherein it is understood that a POSITA orders the tolerance as claimed during manufacturing or machines the surfaces to the tolerance as desired. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
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.
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.
Claims 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 113530477 A TO ZHU, Ke et al. (hereinafter ZHU) as applied to the claims above in view of US 20090155040 A1 to Martin; Tim.
Regarding claim 17 and the limitation a handler for handling cylindrical objects having central axes,
the handler having
wherein at least one clamp is disposed on each arm, each clamp comprising:
a mounting plate;
a piston assembly coupled to the mounting plate;
a central plane of the clamp substantially parallel to the mounting plate and substantially orthogonal to the central axes of the cylindrical objects;
a plurality of outer tongs and inner tongs pivotally coupled to the mounting plate, the outer tongs including first pairs of outer tongs spaced apart on separate sides of the central plane, the inner tongs including second pairs of inner tongs spaced apart on the separate sides of the central plane;
and a plurality of linkage bars pivotally coupled between the piston assembly and the plurality of outer tongs and inner tongs;
wherein, in response to a movement of the piston assembly of the each clamp, the inner and outer tongs of the each clamp pivot between an open position and a closed position of the each clamp (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 1 above incorporated herein by reference wherein it is clear that ZHU anticipates most of the claimed limitations as shown and explained in the rejection of claim 1 above).
ZHU does not appear to expressly disclose the handler having at least two arms and a plurality of clamps.
In analogous art Martin teaches in for example, the figures below:
PNG
media_image11.png
509
570
media_image11.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image12.png
323
773
media_image12.png
Greyscale
And associated descriptive texts a handler having at least two arms and a plurality of clamps (as explained in for example para:
“[0019] A means for actuating each pair of grapple arms 40, 50 is provided to move each of the arms between a first open position (as shown in FIG. 1) where the arms are disengaged from the object to be handled, and a second closed position (as shown in FIG. 2) where each pair of grapple arms engage and grasp the object, namely a respective pipe segment in this instance. In the preferred embodiment an actuator 60 in the form of a hydraulic ram, a linear actuator, or the like, is provided for each grapple arm. As the configuration for each grapple arm is functionally the same, grapple arm 40a will be used to illustrate the actuator structure. The respective ends of the actuator 60 are pivotally mounted at 36 to the left frame 22 and at 49 to an outer portion of the arm 40a intermediate its first and second ends 44, 46. Hence, extension of the actuator moves the arm 40a toward a closed position, and retraction of the actuator moves the arm toward the open position. In the preferred embodiment the operation of the actuators 60 is controlled remotely with one hydraulic system so that all four actuators are moved in concert, namely simultaneously, between the open and closed positions. However, it will also be appreciated that, for particular applications, the actuators may be configured to be individually and independently controlled, for instance so that the first pair of grapple arms 40 can be moved to a different grasping position than the second pair of grapple arms 50. It is also important to note that the actuators are mounted to the grapple arms and respective frame portions to permit the independent movement of the second pair of grapple arms 50 relative to the first pair of grapple arms 40 in the direction of the first common axis X1. Hence, this motion provides the grappler with a first degree of freedom, or movement.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the arms disclosed in Martin with the grapples taught in ZHU with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have been “particularly suited to assist in pipe retrieval from hazardous trenches and in large diameter pipeline tie-ins where workers must perform difficult tasks such as aligning weld joints.” as taught by Martin Para(s):
“[0005] The grapple apparatus of the present invention, also referred to as a "Tie-in Hand", is particularly suited to assist in pipe retrieval from hazardous trenches and in large diameter pipeline tie-ins where workers must perform difficult tasks such as aligning weld joints. Such pipelines can convey large volumes of fluids, such as oil, natural gas or other petroleum products. The grappler is designed to handle pipe segments made of various materials, such as metal, plastic or concrete for use in pipelines such as sewers and the like.”.
Regarding claim 18 and the limitation the handler of claim 17, wherein at least one arm of the handler is extendable to facilitate handling of longer cylindrical objects (see Martin para:
“[0017] Referring specifically to FIG. 1, the grappler frame 20 has a first frame portion 22, and a second frame portion 24 movably secured to the first frame portion. The first frame portion 22, also called the "left frame" for ease of reference, has a hollow elongate housing along a longitudinal axis X1 which is capped at the left end 26 and open at the opposed right end 28 to define an accessible cavity 30 (shown in FIG. 3). The second frame portion 24, or "right frame", has an elongate construction and an exterior shape complimentary to the left frame's cavity 30 so as to snugly and slidingly fit therewithin. Hence, the right frame may slide relative to the left frame along the axis X1. A means for displacing the right frame within the left frame is located in the cavity 30 and operatively engages both frame portions 22, 24. As seen in FIG. 3, the displacing means is preferrably in the form of an internal piston such as a hydraulic ram 34, a linear actuator, or the like, which abuts both the left end 26 of the left frame and a left end 32 of the right frame, and which is capable of both pushing or pulling the right frame within the left frame as indicated by the arrows 35. The ram 34 should be capable of remote operation by a user.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the arms disclosed in Martin with the grapples taught in ZHU with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have been “particularly suited to assist in pipe retrieval from hazardous trenches and in large diameter pipeline tie-ins where workers must perform difficult tasks such as aligning weld joints.” as taught by Martin Para(s):
“[0005] The grapple apparatus of the present invention, also referred to as a "Tie-in Hand", is particularly suited to assist in pipe retrieval from hazardous trenches and in large diameter pipeline tie-ins where workers must perform difficult tasks such as aligning weld joints. Such pipelines can convey large volumes of fluids, such as oil, natural gas or other petroleum products. The grappler is designed to handle pipe segments made of various materials, such as metal, plastic or concrete for use in pipelines such as sewers and the like.”.
Regarding claim 19 and the limitation the handler of claim 17, wherein each of a first arm and a second arm includes the at least one clamp and wherein the clamp of the first arm is configured to handle cylindrical objects synchronously with the clamp of the second arm (as shown in the figures above Martin teaches the pipes are joined which a POSITA understand requires synchronicity in the pipe movements which is obtained by the movements of the grapples holding the pipes and that once the pipes are “joined” they must be held together to prevent from breaking the joint apart while moving the pipes into their final locations as is known in the art (see para [0005] of Martin).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the arms disclosed in Martin with the grapples taught in ZHU with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have been “particularly suited to assist in pipe retrieval from hazardous trenches and in large diameter pipeline tie-ins where workers must perform difficult tasks such as aligning weld joints.” as taught by Martin Para(s):
“[0005] The grapple apparatus of the present invention, also referred to as a "Tie-in Hand", is particularly suited to assist in pipe retrieval from hazardous trenches and in large diameter pipeline tie-ins where workers must perform difficult tasks such as aligning weld joints. Such pipelines can convey large volumes of fluids, such as oil, natural gas or other petroleum products. The grappler is designed to handle pipe segments made of various materials, such as metal, plastic or concrete for use in pipelines such as sewers and the like.”.
Regarding claim 20 and the limitation the handler of claim 17, wherein at least a first clamp on a first arm is configured to handle cylindrical objects independently from a second clamp on a second arm (as shown in the figures above Martin teaches the pipes are joined which a POSITA understands requires the respective pipes to be loaded into each clamp “independently” before they are joined together).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the arms disclosed in Martin with the grapples taught in ZHU with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have been “particularly suited to assist in pipe retrieval from hazardous trenches and in large diameter pipeline tie-ins where workers must perform difficult tasks such as aligning weld joints.” as taught by Martin Para(s):
“[0005] The grapple apparatus of the present invention, also referred to as a "Tie-in Hand", is particularly suited to assist in pipe retrieval from hazardous trenches and in large diameter pipeline tie-ins where workers must perform difficult tasks such as aligning weld joints. Such pipelines can convey large volumes of fluids, such as oil, natural gas or other petroleum products. The grappler is designed to handle pipe segments made of various materials, such as metal, plastic or concrete for use in pipelines such as sewers and the like.”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as teaching, inter alia, the state of the art of pipe grapples at the time of the invention. For example:
US 20120297933 A1 to LAVALLEY; Jason et al. teaches, inter alia an ATTACHMENT FOR MAKING UP OR BREAKING OUT PIPE in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
PNG
media_image13.png
423
311
media_image13.png
Greyscale
“An attachment is described that is configured for attachment to an arm of a piece of heavy construction equipment. The attachment is configured to rotate a section of pipe during break out (i.e. disconnection or disassembly) from another section of pipe and/or make up (i.e. connection or assembly) with another section of pipe. The attachment is configured to break the joint or torque the joint to a predetermined torque value, unthread or thread pipe, and lift the pipe under the power of the heavy construction equipment.”.
US 3545313 A to KELLEY BENJAMIN F teaches, inter alia a COMBINED GRAPPLE AND BACK-UP TONG in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
PNG
media_image14.png
537
403
media_image14.png
Greyscale
“(18) Referring now to the drawings in greater detail, there is shown in FIG. 1 a frame 1 including a housing 3 in which is disposed a grapple as in my above-identified patent, which surrounds and grasps and rotates a length of tubing 5 relative to a drill stem coupling 6. Frame 1 is supported by a standard 7 having a plurality of holes 9'
(19) through a plate at its upper end, in a selected one of which is disposed the pin 11 carried at the lower -md of a piston rod 13 whose piston is disposed in a cylinder which is not shown but which is above the top of FIG. 1.
(20) Hydraulic fluid under pressure operates this cylinder and piston assembly and is also conveyed by conduits 15 to a control bank 16 from which the elevation of frame 1 may be controlled and also the operation of the grapple and backup tong.
(21) Suspended from frame 1 is a backup tong illustrated generally at 17, whose body is in the from of a sleeve 19 slidable on a horizontal shaft 21 which is secured to and extends radially from a vertical sleeve 23. Sleeve 23, in turn, is vertically slidably disposed on a downwardly extending shaft 25 which is fixedly secured to frame 1.”.
US-5206980-A to Chapman; Johnny D. teaches, inter alia an Apparatus for aligning ends of pipes in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
PNG
media_image15.png
360
524
media_image15.png
Greyscale
“A frame (20) which open at the bottom has supporting plates (22, 24, 26) and a bottommost support piece (28) connecting at least two support plates (22, 24, 26). The frame is designed to fit over lengths of pipes to be aligned. Two sets of (40, 41) clamps consisting of at least one clamp each are mounted on the frame (20). The sets of clamps (40, 41) are translatable with respect to one another. One set of clamps (40) engages one of the pipes (13) to be aligned. The other set of clamps (41) engages the other pipe (11) to be aligned. Once the pipes (11, 13) are engaged the facing ends are brought together by translating the sets of clamps (40, 41) toward each other. A roller (30) is affixed to one end of the frame (20) to facilitate movement of the apparatus (10) along a length of pipe.”.
US 1966240 A to ERDAHL NICHOLAI M teaches an Automatic pipe grapple in the figures below:
PNG
media_image16.png
532
543
media_image16.png
Greyscale
US 3112830 A to PODLESAK JOHN A teaches a Pole handling device in the figure below:
PNG
media_image17.png
707
583
media_image17.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL LAWSON GREENE JR whose telephone number is (571)272-6876. The examiner can normally be reached on MON-THUR 7-5:30PM (EST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571) 272-7298. 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.
/DANIEL L GREENE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665 20260222