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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) are as detailed hereafter:
Lower Base Portion: “With reference to FIG. 3 , the frame assembly includes a lower base portion 20 and an upper frame portion 30. The lower base portion includes foot member 22 and platform 24 spaced apart from the foot member by way of a structure 23. The lower base portion defines a front 26 and a back 28. In the configuration shown, the foot member and the platform are generally parallel to each other and are spaced apart so as to elevate the platform. As will be explained, the welding assembly is coupled to the frame assembly through the coupling assembly. As such, it will be understood that the platform has the capacity to support the weight of the frame assembly and the welding assembly. The upper frame portion 30 extends from the lower base portion in a generally upward direction.”, para. [0044]-[0045].
First Mating Member: “The locating assembly 18 is shown generally in FIG. 1 , and in greater detail in FIGS. 9 and 10 , as comprising a first mating structure 116, a second mating structure 118 and an actuator 120. In the configuration shown, the first mating structure 116 comprises a generally circular opening that is fixed to the welder frame 40 proximate the lower cross plate 50. The second mating structure 118 comprises a pin member having a frustoconical configuration, wherein the upper portion has a diameter that is smaller than the opening defining the first mating structure 116 and the lower portion has a diameter that substantially matches the diameter of the first mating structure. The second mating structure is coupled to an actuator that is mounted to the frame assembly 12. The actuator facilitates movement of the second mating structure relative to the first mating structure between a first position and a second position. In the first position, the lower portion of the second mating structure engages the first mating structure and the two are engaged such that relative translative movement therebetween is precluded. In the second position, the upper portion of the second mating structure remains engageable with the first mating structure. As the upper portion is smaller than the opening of the first mating structure, relative movement between the first mating structure and the second mating structure is permitted. When returned to the first position, the conical outer surface of the second mating structure hits the first mating structure and moves the second mating structure until the two are in alignment so that the second mating structure can be fully inserted into the first mating structure, thereby precluding relative movement therebetween. As the configurations are circular, the first configuration returns or re-centers the welding head to an orientation that is generally in the center of the range of movement. It will be understood that the relative size difference between the two mating structures defines the range of movement therebetween. Additionally, as the first mating structure is translationally fixed (in the horizontal direction) to the welder frame and the second mating structure is translationally fixed (again in the horizontal direction) to the frame assembly, the amount of relative movement between the two structures (as defined by the pivoting of the suspension frame about the frame axle and the welding axle) is defined by the difference in the size and position of the first mating structure and the second mating structure. In some configurations, the size of the first mating structure and the size and configuration of the upper end of the second mating structure define the limits of the movement of the electrodes and the pivoting of the suspension frame about the frame axle and the welding arm. Without this interaction, the pivoting of the suspension frame could be limited only by interference with the frame assembly and the welding assembly. For example, a number of different first mating structures and second mating structures can be provided (or second mating structures that have multiple different upper end diameters) so as to alter the amount of movement of the welder frame (and therefore electrodes) relative to the frame assembly. It will further be understood that in other configurations, the actuator may be associated with the first mating structure, instead of the second mating structure. In other configurations, multiple actuators may be utilized to, for example, achieve different movements and different ranges of movement. Furthermore, it will be understood that, while a circular configuration (i.e., cylindrical) is shown for the first mating structure, and a frustoconical configuration is shown for the second mating structure, the two structures may have different shapes, and cross-sectional configurations, such as square, triangular, polygonal and the like, as well as arbitrary shapes to achieve different movements, patterns of movement and ranges of movement. Essentially, the locating assembly allows for an engagement range (or, otherwise termed, a range of acceptable relative positioning), and a centering position, wherein the assembly is locked in a generally central position within the range of motion.”, para. [0057]-[0061].
Second Mating Member: “The locating assembly 18 is shown generally in FIG. 1 , and in greater detail in FIGS. 9 and 10 , as comprising a first mating structure 116, a second mating structure 118 and an actuator 120. In the configuration shown, the first mating structure 116 comprises a generally circular opening that is fixed to the welder frame 40 proximate the lower cross plate 50. The second mating structure 118 comprises a pin member having a frustoconical configuration, wherein the upper portion has a diameter that is smaller than the opening defining the first mating structure 116 and the lower portion has a diameter that substantially matches the diameter of the first mating structure. The second mating structure is coupled to an actuator that is mounted to the frame assembly 12. The actuator facilitates movement of the second mating structure relative to the first mating structure between a first position and a second position. In the first position, the lower portion of the second mating structure engages the first mating structure and the two are engaged such that relative translative movement therebetween is precluded. In the second position, the upper portion of the second mating structure remains engageable with the first mating structure. As the upper portion is smaller than the opening of the first mating structure, relative movement between the first mating structure and the second mating structure is permitted. When returned to the first position, the conical outer surface of the second mating structure hits the first mating structure and moves the second mating structure until the two are in alignment so that the second mating structure can be fully inserted into the first mating structure, thereby precluding relative movement therebetween. As the configurations are circular, the first configuration returns or re-centers the welding head to an orientation that is generally in the center of the range of movement. It will be understood that the relative size difference between the two mating structures defines the range of movement therebetween. Additionally, as the first mating structure is translationally fixed (in the horizontal direction) to the welder frame and the second mating structure is translationally fixed (again in the horizontal direction) to the frame assembly, the amount of relative movement between the two structures (as defined by the pivoting of the suspension frame about the frame axle and the welding axle) is defined by the difference in the size and position of the first mating structure and the second mating structure. In some configurations, the size of the first mating structure and the size and configuration of the upper end of the second mating structure define the limits of the movement of the electrodes and the pivoting of the suspension frame about the frame axle and the welding arm. Without this interaction, the pivoting of the suspension frame could be limited only by interference with the frame assembly and the welding assembly. For example, a number of different first mating structures and second mating structures can be provided (or second mating structures that have multiple different upper end diameters) so as to alter the amount of movement of the welder frame (and therefore electrodes) relative to the frame assembly. It will further be understood that in other configurations, the actuator may be associated with the first mating structure, instead of the second mating structure. In other configurations, multiple actuators may be utilized to, for example, achieve different movements and different ranges of movement. Furthermore, it will be understood that, while a circular configuration (i.e., cylindrical) is shown for the first mating structure, and a frustoconical configuration is shown for the second mating structure, the two structures may have different shapes, and cross-sectional configurations, such as square, triangular, polygonal and the like, as well as arbitrary shapes to achieve different movements, patterns of movement and ranges of movement. Essentially, the locating assembly allows for an engagement range (or, otherwise termed, a range of acceptable relative positioning), and a centering position, wherein the assembly is locked in a generally central position within the range of motion.”, para. [0057]-[0061].
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 17 recites “a second mating member attached to the lower base portion”; however, FIGS. 2 and 9 illustrate that this limitation is not structurally compatible with the figures (with a specific emphasis upon FIGS. 2 & 9) as the second mating member 118 is not attached to the lower base portion 20. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 29 recites “selectively allowing movement of the welding frame relative to the suspension frame and relative to the lower base portion …. allowing the movement of the welding frame relative to at least one of the lower base portion and the suspension frame into the desired orientation” in which the “allowing” limitation is contradictory to the “selectively allowing” limitation. Appropriate correction is required,
The remaining claims are rejected for at least the reason of their respective direct and/or indirect dependency from one of the aforementioned independent claims. Appropriate correction is required.
\
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH W ISKRA whose telephone number is (313) 446-4866. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 09:00-17:00 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, IBRAHIME ABRAHAM can be reached on 571-270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSEPH W ISKRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights