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 Status
Claims 1-21 are pending:
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 07/28/2023 is/are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because
Use of shading reduces understanding and legibility of the drawings. See MPEP 1.84(m).
Fig1/4/5
Unsatisfactory reproduction characteristics due to insufficiently dense, dark, and well-defined lines that are not heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. See MPEP 1.`84(l).
Fig1/2/4/5/8/9
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 9, 11-14, 18, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Eskandari (US 2021/0069813)
Claim 1
Eskandari discloses:
“A system comprising:
a robotic welding apparatus (Fig2, robotic welding system 100) configured to weld metal sections (Fig1/2/2A, pipe sections P) together along a seam (Abstract, Para32-33; Fig2/2A, welding torch T shown welding at seam S);
an input device (Fig2/2A, camera C) configured to produce positioning input for the robotic welding apparatus while welding (Abstract, Para34/33/35, camera C is used during welding to detect and control positioning of the welding system 100); and
a controller (Fig2/2A, control cabinet 101, controller 103, processor 107) configured to control the robotic welding apparatus (Para33, control cabinet 101 controls operation of welding system 100) in accordance with (i) a recording state in which operation of the robotic welding apparatus is controlled and recorded while welding in a root pass based on the positioning input to produce recorded positioning data (Fig3/Starting at Para36; Fig3E/Starting at Para46: two method embodiments of the root pass where the welding positioning is recorded), and (ii) an automatic state in which operation of the robotic welding apparatus is automatically controlled while welding in a subsequent pass based on the recorded positioning data (Fig4/Starting at Para53: additional welding passes after the recorded root pass and based upon the recorded positioning data in the root pass);
wherein the controller (Fig2/2A, control cabinet 101, controller 103, processor 107) is configured to selectively record motion of the robotic welding apparatus such that the recorded positioning data utilized in the automatic state omits (Para41/51, spatial data in filtered thus implicitly omitting raw data due to smoothing/filtering) at least one of (i) … and (ii) stop-start motions of the robotic welding apparatus (Para41/51, spatial data in filtered thus implicitly omitting raw data due to smoothing/filtering).”
Claim 2
Eskandari discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the metal sections comprise pipe sections (Fig1/2/2A, pipe sections P) that have been stitched together with stitches (Fig1/2/2A, stitches St) to form a pipe string (Fig1/2/2A, pipe string connected to positioner 105; Para32), and the system further comprises: a positioner (Fig1/2/2A, positioner 105; Para32) configured to rotate the pipe string in relation to the robotic welding apparatus (Para32) such that the robotic welding apparatus welds along the seam which is between the pipe sections (Fig1/2/2A, arrangement shown; Para32/33; Fig3/3E/4 show welding along seam/stitch region); wherein the root pass and the subsequent pass both involve rotating the pipe string in relation to the robotic welding apparatus by a full rotation (Para45/52, controller monitors positioner to signal when one revolution of the pipes has been completed during operation).”
Claim 9
Eskandari discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the input device comprises a camera (Fig2/2A, camera C).”
Claim 11
Eskandari discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the input device comprises a laser device (Para35, laser camera is used in addition to camera C).”
Claim 12
Eskandari discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the controller comprises a PLC (programmable logic controller) (Para33, controller 103 is a PLC – programmable logic controller).”
Claim 13
Eskandari discloses: “”
“A method comprising:
welding, using a robotic welding apparatus (Fig2, robotic welding system 100; Para33), metal sections (Fig1/2/2A, pipe sections P) together along a seam (Abstract, Para32-33; Fig2/2A, welding torch T shown welding at seam S) in a root pass (Fig3/Starting at Para36; Fig3E/Starting at Para46: two method embodiments of the root pass where the welding positioning is recorded) in accordance with a recording state (Fig3/Starting at Para36; Fig3E/Starting at Para46: two method embodiments of the root pass where the welding positioning is recorded) in which operation of the robotic welding apparatus is controlled and recorded (Fig2/2A, control cabinet 101, controller 103, processor 107; Para33, control cabinet 101 controls operation of welding system 100) based on positioning input from an input device (Fig2/2A, camera C) to produce recorded positioning data (Abstract, Para34/33/35, camera C is used during welding to detect and control positioning of the welding system 100);
welding, using a robotic welding apparatus (Fig2, robotic welding system 100; Para33), the metal sections together along the seam in a subsequent pass in accordance with an automatic state in which operation of the robotic welding apparatus is automatically controlled based on the recorded positioning data (Fig4/Starting at Para53: additional welding passes after the recorded root pass and based upon the recorded positioning data in the root pass);
wherein the method comprises selectively recording motion of the robotic welding apparatus such that the recorded positioning data utilized in the automatic state omits (Para41/51, spatial data in filtered thus implicitly omitting raw data due to smoothing/filtering) at least one of (i) … and (ii) stop-start motions of the robotic welding apparatus (Para41/51, spatial data in filtered thus implicitly omitting raw data due to smoothing/filtering).”
Claim 14
Eskandari discloses: “The method of claim 13, wherein the metal sections comprise pipe sections (Fig1/2/2A, pipe sections P) that have been stitched together with stitches (Fig1/2/2A, stitches St) to form a pipe string (Fig1/2/2A, pipe string connected to positioner 105; Para32), and the method further comprises: rotating the pipe string in relation to the robotic welding apparatus (Fig1/2/2A, positioner 105; Para32) such that the robotic welding apparatus welds along the seam which is between the pipe sections (Fig1/2/2A, arrangement shown; Para32; Fig3/3E/4 show welding along seam/stitch region); wherein the root pass and the subsequent pass both involve rotating the pipe string in relation to the robotic welding apparatus by a full rotation (Para45/52, controller monitors positioner to signal when one revolution of the pipes has been completed during operation).”
Claim 18
Eskandari discloses: “The method of claim 13, wherein the recorded positioning data omits stop-start motions of the robotic welding apparatus (Para41/51, spatial data in filtered thus implicitly omitting raw data due to smoothing/filtering).”
Claim 21
Eskandari discloses:
“A non-transitory computer readable medium (Para66/68/69) having
recorded thereon statements and instructions (Para66/68/69) that, when executed by control circuitry of a welding system (Para66/68/69),
configure the welding system to implement the method of claim 13 (see claim 13).”
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.
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(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eskandari (US 2021/0069813) in view of Jacovetty (US 8,115,138)
Claim 10
Eskandari discloses the arrangement of Claim 1. Eskandari discloses (Para35) the application of a plurality of cameras.
Eskandari is silent to the application of a joystick as the input device.
Jacovetty teaches (C13L27-33; Fig11, input device 1136; C1L16-19) that cameras and a joystick are known in the art alternative input devices for computer welding systems.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the arrangement of Eskandari to substitute a joystick input device for one of the additional cameras of Eskandari, as Jacovetty teaches that cameras and joysticks are known in the art alternative input devices for computer welding systems, and such a modification would merely be a simple substitution for one known in the art input device for computer welding system for another, and the resulting arrangement has the reasonable expectation of successfully providing the arrangement of Eskandari with an additional working and known joystick input device which provides flexibility for a user when using the arrangement due to increased input options.
Claim(s) 1-5, 9, 11-18, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eskandari (US 2021/0069813) in view of Devengenzo (US 9,919,424)
Claim 1
Eskandari discloses:
“A system comprising:
a robotic welding apparatus (Fig2, robotic welding system 100) configured to weld metal sections together along a seam (Abstract; Fig2/2A, welding torch T shown welding at seam S);
an input device (Fig2/2A, camera C) configured to produce positioning input for the robotic welding apparatus while welding (Abstract, Para34/33/35, camera C is used during welding to detect and control positioning of the welding system 100); and
a controller (Fig2/2A, control cabinet 101, controller 103, processor 107) configured to control the robotic welding apparatus (Para33, control cabinet 101 controls operation of welding system 100) in accordance with (i) a recording state in which operation of the robotic welding apparatus is controlled and recorded while welding in a root pass based on the positioning input to produce recorded positioning data (Fig3/Starting at Para36; Fig3E/Starting at Para46: two method embodiments of the root pass where the welding positioning is recorded), and (ii) an automatic state in which operation of the robotic welding apparatus is automatically controlled while welding in a subsequent pass based on the recorded positioning data (Fig4/Starting at Para53: welding passes after the recorded root pass and based upon the recorded positioning data in the root pass);
wherein the controller (Fig2/2A, control cabinet 101, controller 103, processor 107) is configured to selectively record motion of the robotic welding apparatus such that the recorded positioning data utilized in the automatic state omits (Para41/51, spatial data in filtered thus implicitly omitting raw data due to smoothing/filtering) …”
Eskandari does not explicitly disclose that the positioning data is filtered/omitted for the “initial transient motions” of the apparatus.
Devengenzo teaches (C10L60-C11L7, C11L20-34) that it is known in the art to selectively process and/or record the received positional/movement input signals in order to optimize/revise the raw movements, example to omit “jiggling” or other non-desired movements to result in a smooth operation, during an initial/training run of the robot arm.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the arrangement of Eskandari to expand the existing positional filtering system to apply the known in the art process, as taught by Devengenzo, to selectively process and/or record the received positional/movement input signals in order to optimize/revise the raw movements during a root pass of robot arm, as such a modification would merely be applying a known technique from Devengenzo to a known device of Eskandari which is ready for the improvement to field the predictable results of improved robot weld movement due to smoother operation due to optimized/revised movement path recordings.
Claim 2
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the metal sections comprise pipe sections (Eskandari: Fig1/2/2A, pipe sections P) that have been stitched together with stitches (Eskandari: Fig1/2/2A, stitches St) to form a pipe string (Eskandari: Fig1/2/2A, pipe string connected to positioner 105; Para32), and the system further comprises: a positioner (Eskandari: Fig1/2/2A, positioner 105; Para32) configured to rotate the pipe string in relation to the robotic welding apparatus (Eskandari: Para32) such that the robotic welding apparatus welds along the seam which is between the pipe sections (Eskandari: Fig1/2/2A, arrangement shown; Para32/33; Fig3/3E/4 show welding along seam/stitch region); wherein the root pass and the subsequent pass both involve rotating the pipe string in relation to the robotic welding apparatus by a full rotation (Eskandari: Para45/52, controller monitors positioner to signal when one revolution of the pipes has been completed during operation).”
Claim 3
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the recorded positioning data omits the initial transient motions of the robotic welding apparatus (limitation is within the bounds of the modification as discussed in Claim 1), and the controller is configured to omit the initial transient motions by not recording motions for an initial time period at a beginning of the root pass (limitation is within the bounds of the modification as discussed in Claim 1).”
Claim 4
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the recorded positioning data omits the initial transient motions of the robotic welding apparatus (limitation is within the bounds of the modification as discussed in Claim 1), and the controller is configured to omit the initial transient motions by recording motions starting from a beginning of the root pass and removing recorded motions of the robotic welding apparatus during an initial time period at the beginning of the root pass (limitation is within the bounds of the modification as discussed in Claim 1).”
Claim 5
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the recorded positioning data omits stop-start motions of the robotic welding apparatus (limitation is within the bounds of the modification as discussed in Claim 1), and the system is configured to omit start-stop motions by pausing recording when the robotic welding apparatus stops moving relative to the metal sections (limitation is within the bounds of the modification as discussed in Claim 1; Devengenzo: C1120-34, welding movement is recorded, which is a movement relative to the workpiece) and resuming recording when the robotic welding apparatus starts moving relative to the metal sections (limitation is within the bounds of the modification as discussed in Claim 1; Devengenzo: C1120-34, welding movement is recorded, which is a movement relative to the workpiece).”
Claim 9
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the input device comprises a camera (Eskandari: Fig2/2A, camera C).”
Claim 11
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the input device comprises a laser device (Eskandari: Para35, laser camera is used in addition to camera C).”
Claim 12
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The system of claim 1, wherein the controller comprises a PLC (programmable logic controller) (Eskandari: Para33, controller 103 is a PLC – programmable logic controller).”
Claim 13
Eskandari discloses: “”
“A method comprising:
welding, using a robotic welding apparatus (Fig2, robotic welding system 100; Para33), metal sections (Fig1/2/2A, pipe sections P) together along a seam (Abstract, Para32-33; Fig2/2A, welding torch T shown welding at seam S) in a root pass (Fig3/Starting at Para36; Fig3E/Starting at Para46: two method embodiments of the root pass where the welding positioning is recorded) in accordance with a recording state (Fig3/Starting at Para36; Fig3E/Starting at Para46: two method embodiments of the root pass where the welding positioning is recorded) in which operation of the robotic welding apparatus is controlled and recorded (Fig2/2A, control cabinet 101, controller 103, processor 107; Para33, control cabinet 101 controls operation of welding system 100) based on positioning input from an input device (Fig2/2A, camera C) to produce recorded positioning data (Abstract, Para34/33/35, camera C is used during welding to detect and control positioning of the welding system 100);
welding, using a robotic welding apparatus (Fig2, robotic welding system 100; Para33), the metal sections together along the seam in a subsequent pass in accordance with an automatic state in which operation of the robotic welding apparatus is automatically controlled based on the recorded positioning data (Fig4/Starting at Para53: additional welding passes after the recorded root pass and based upon the recorded positioning data in the root pass);
wherein the method comprises selectively recording motion of the robotic welding apparatus such that the recorded positioning data utilized in the automatic state omits (Para41/51, spatial data in filtered thus implicitly omitting raw data due to smoothing/filtering) … ”
Eskandari does not explicitly disclose that the positioning data is filtered/omitted for the “initial transient motions” of the apparatus.
Devengenzo teaches (C10L60-C11L7, C11L20-34) that it is known in the art to selectively process and/or record the received positional/movement input signals in order to optimize/revise the raw movements, example to omit “jiggling” or other non-desired movements to result in a smooth operation, during an initial/training run of the robot arm.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the arrangement of Eskandari to expand the existing positional filtering system to apply the known in the art process, as taught by Devengenzo, to selectively process and/or record the received positional/movement input signals in order to optimize/revise the raw movements during a root pass of robot arm, as such a modification would merely be applying a known technique from Devengenzo to a known device of Eskandari which is ready for the improvement to field the predictable results of improved robot weld movement due to smoother operation due to optimized/revised movement path recordings.
Claim 14
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The method of claim 13, wherein the metal sections comprise pipe sections (Eskandari: Fig1/2/2A, pipe sections P) that have been stitched together with stitches (Eskandari: Fig1/2/2A, stitches St) to form a pipe string (Eskandari: Fig1/2/2A, pipe string connected to positioner 105; Para32), and the method further comprises: rotating the pipe string in relation to the robotic welding apparatus (Eskandari: Fig1/2/2A, positioner 105; Para32) such that the robotic welding apparatus welds along the seam which is between the pipe sections (Eskandari: Fig1/2/2A, arrangement shown; Para32; Fig3/3E/4 show welding along seam/stitch region); wherein the root pass and the subsequent pass both involve rotating the pipe string in relation to the robotic welding apparatus by a full rotation (Eskandari: Para45/52, controller monitors positioner to signal when one revolution of the pipes has been completed during operation).”
Claim 15
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The method of claim 13, wherein the recorded positioning data omits the initial transient motions of the robotic welding apparatus (limitation is within the bounds of the modification as discussed in Claim 1).”
Claim 16
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The method of claim 15, wherein the recorded positioning data omits the initial transient motions of the robotic welding apparatus by: omitting the motions of the robotic welding apparatus for an initial time period at a beginning of the root pass (limitation is within the bounds of the modification as discussed in Claim 1).”
Claim 17
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The method of claim 16, wherein omitting motions of the robotic welding apparatus for the initial time period comprises: removing recorded motions of the robotic welding apparatus during the initial time period (limitation is within the bounds of the modification as discussed in Claim 1; movement data inherently exists over a time period).”
Claim 18
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses: “The method of claim 13, wherein the recorded positioning data omits stop-start motions of the robotic welding apparatus (Eskandari: Para41/51, spatial data in filtered thus implicitly omitting raw data due to smoothing/filtering; limitation is within the bounds of the combination as discussed in Claim 13).”
Claim 21
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses:
“A non-transitory computer readable medium (Eskandari: Para66/68/69) having
recorded thereon statements and instructions (Eskandari: Para66/68/69) that, when executed by control circuitry of a welding system (Eskandari: Para66/68/69),
configure the welding system to implement the method of claim 13 (see claim 13).”
Claim(s) 6-8, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eskandari (US 2021/0069813) in view of Devengenzo (US 9,919,424), and in further view of Heinz (EP 1 582 286)
Claim 6
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo disclose the arrangement of Claim 1.
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses (Devengenzo: C10L60-C11L7, C11L20-34) that it is known remove non-desired movements.
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo is silent to responding to a welding mishap, repeating the weld, and omitting the welding mishap data, as claimed in Claim 6.
Heinz teaches (Abstract, Last Para before Claims; Claim 7) that it is known in the art when a faulty weld is detected, then the system will perform a repeat weld over the faulty weld using a different/modified set of welding parameters including position control.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo to account for faulty welds, as Heinz teaches that it is known in the art when a faulty weld is detected, then the system will perform a repeat weld over the faulty weld using a different/modified set of welding parameters including position control and thus that the original recording positioning of the modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo should be revised/optimized to record the correct welding pass and to omit the faulty welding pass, as a faulty welding pass is not preferable, and the resulting arrangement has the reasonable expectation of successfully providing the modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo with an improved method of recording/omitting welding data by teaching an accommodation method for responding to detected faulty welds as taught by Heinz.
Claim 7
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo and Heinz discloses: “The system of claim 6, wherein omitting motions of the robotic welding apparatus during the welding mishap involves removing recorded motions of the robotic welding apparatus during the welding mishap (limitation is within the bounds of the combination as discussed in claim 6).”
Claim 8
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo and Heinz discloses: “The system of claim 7, wherein omitting motions of the robotic welding apparatus during the welding mishap involves replacing the recorded motions of the robotic welding apparatus during the welding mishap with recorded motions during the repeat welding in the region of the welding mishap (limitation is within the bounds of the combination as discussed in claim 6).”
Claim 19
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo disclose the arrangement of Claim 18.
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses (Devengenzo: C10L60-C11L7, C11L20-34) that it is known remove non-desired movements.
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo is silent to responding to a welding mishap, repeating the weld, and omitting the welding mishap data, as claimed in Claim 6.
Heinz teaches (Abstract, Last Para before Claims; Claim 7) that it is known in the art when a faulty weld is detected, then the system will perform a repeat weld over the faulty weld using a different/modified set of welding parameters including position control.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo to account for faulty welds, as Heinz teaches that it is known in the art when a faulty weld is detected, then the system will perform a repeat weld over the faulty weld using a different/modified set of welding parameters including position control and thus that the original recording positioning of the modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo should be revised/optimized to record the correct welding pass and to omit the faulty welding pass, as a faulty welding pass is not preferable, and the resulting arrangement has the reasonable expectation of successfully providing the modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo with an improved method of recording/omitting welding data by teaching an accommodation method for responding to detected faulty welds as taught by Heinz.
Claim 20
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo and Heinz discloses: “The method of claim 19, wherein omitting the motions of the robotic welding apparatus during the welding mishap comprises: replacing recorded motions of the robotic welding apparatus leading up to the welding mishap with recorded motions of the robotic welding apparatus during the repeat welding (limitation is within the bounds of the combination as discussed in claim 19).”
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eskandari (US 2021/0069813) in view of Devengenzo (US 9,919,424), and in further view of Jacovetty (US 8,115,138)
Claim 10
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo discloses the arrangement of Claim 1. Eskandari discloses (Para35) the application of a plurality of cameras.
The modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo is silent to the application of a joystick as the input device.
Jacovetty teaches (C13L27-33; Fig11, input device 1136; C1L16-19) that cameras and a joystick are known in the art alternative input devices for computer welding systems.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo to substitute a joystick input device for one of the additional cameras of Eskandari, as Jacovetty teaches that cameras and joysticks are known in the art alternative input devices for computer welding systems, and such a modification would merely be a simple substitution for one known in the art input device for computer welding system for another, and the resulting arrangement has the reasonable expectation of successfully providing the modified arrangement of Eskandari by the teachings of Devengenzo with an additional working and known joystick input device which provides flexibility for a user when using the arrangement due to increased input options.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 12,304,013 to Eskandari: US Patent version of Eskandari above
US 12,162,098 to Gilad: Fig1/7, pipe welding in layers at seam
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN HUNTER JR whose telephone number is (571)272-5093. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-18.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at 571 272 9059. 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.
/JOHN S HUNTER, JR/Examiner, Art Unit 3761