DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I claims 1-10,20 and 22 in the reply filed on 1-12-2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that, as amended, Group II and III claims are based on corresponding technical features in the groups. This is not found persuasive because Group I claims require that a cross-sectional profile of a tubular segment is measured at or near a welded seam after welding and this special technical feature is a special technical feature that is not required by the Group II or Group III claims.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim(s) 1,5,10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sprung et al. (4,651,914) in view of Hasegawa et al. (2020/0038929). Sprung discloses a method of forming a tube (Figs. 6a-6f) comprising pressing a metal strip segment (16) into a tubular shape (col. 3, lines 64-68) with rollers (28,30) so that opposite longitudinal ends (col. 3, line 68-col. 4, line 1) of the strip meet to form a seam and welding the seam (32,34; col. 4, lines 2-5, Fig. 5) to join the longitudinal ends. After welding, the tubular shape is corrected in a straightener comprising a roller press (38, Fig. 6g; col. 4, lines 6-8). Sprung discloses a computer control (42; col. 4, lines 27-33) that is configured to control the forming rollers (28,30), the welder (32,34) and the roller press straightener (38). Sprung discloses that after welding an optical pyrometer (44; Fig. 5) detects a weld temperature (col. 4, lines 48-51) at the welding seam and the computer control is configured to control the welding transformer (46) and mill speed and that the computer control (42) is configured to control the roller press straightener to vary a bend, sag or radius of the tube (col. 7, lines 19-23). Sprung does not disclose that a cross-sectional profile of the tube is measured at a position near the seam. Hasegawa teaches forming a strip segment (1) with forming rollers ([0089], lines 3-6) and welding (7; [0089], lines 8-15) ends (4,4) of the strip segment together (Fig. 1) to form a tube. Hasegawa teaches that after welding an imaging device (8) is configured to measure a cross-sectional profile (geometric V-convergence point V1; [0090], lines 1-10) of at least part of the strip segment (1) at or near (region of 5-30mm; [0090], lines 13-14) the welded seam. The profile measurement is fed into a control unit (100; [0092], lines 1-7) and a judgement ([0096],[0105) is made to whether the cross-sectional profile is in misalignment. It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to substitute the profile sensor of Hasegawa for the optical pyrometer of Sprung so as to create an image of the profile of the welding seam in a segment of the tube that is useable to identify whether a shape of the tube needs to be corrected by the straightener roller press following welding of the tube seam. Regarding claims 5 and 20, the roller press of Sprung (Figs. 6a-6f) comprises rollers (28,30) which are a different roller press from the roller press (38) which straightens and corrects the tube shape. Regarding claim 10, a tower or foundation is a tubular structure and Sprung discloses offshore construction of a tubular structure in a mobile former on a barge.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Archer (3,738,149) in view of Yamamoto et al. (JP 2006-272365). Archer discloses a method of forming a tube in a roller press (Figs. 2a-2d) comprising pressing a metal strip segment (20) into a tubular shape (col. 2, lines 40-45) with rollers (16,18,24,26) in the roller press so that opposite longitudinal ends (open ends; col. 2, line 52) of the strip segment meet to form a seam and welding the seam (col. 2, lines 53-55) to join the longitudinal ends. After welding, the tubular shape is corrected in the roller press (col. 2, lines 56-58). Archer does not disclose that a cross-sectional profile of the tube near the welding seam is measured and that the measurement data is used to adjust the tube shape. Yamamoto teaches that a metal strip segment formed into a tube (P) is corrected in a roller press (Figs. 3 and 4) wherein a sensor (1b; [0014]) in a measuring device (1) is configured to measure a cross-sectional profile (shape) of the tube (P) and diameter (radius) data that is measured [0016] is fed into a control unit (2). A calculation unit (2b) of the control unit (2) calculates and compares whether a roundness (actual cross-sectional profile) is within a specified range [0018] and thereafter the tube is straightened by detecting the weld bead (Pb; [0020]) and correcting the cross-sectional profile in the roller press with a corrector (4) until the cross-sectional profile is determined to be a true roundness [0027] with a diameter range between a maximum and minimum diameter. It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the roller press of Archer to include a cross-sectional profile measurement device and control unit as taught by Yamamoto in order to control the rounding of the tube in the roller press after welding to be within an acceptable range based on measurement of the diameter.
Regarding claim 2, Yamamoto teaches a contact type sensor (1b, Fig. 1; [0013], lines 120-122) measurement tool wherein distance of the tool is a contact (zero distance) between a profile of the tube near the detected weld bead (Pb) and the measurement tool. Yamamoto teaches that a non-contact type sensing device (light beam; [0021]) is useable wherein location data near the weld bead (Pb) is measured by a light beam.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Yamamoto teaches diameter (radius) data [0014],[0016] wherein the control device (2) is operated to bring the actual diameter to a set diameter between a maximum diameter and a minimum diameter, it is obvious that when a diameter is calculated the radius of a tube is known, since diameter = radius/2.
Regarding claim 6, Archer discloses rolling the strip segment (20) into a tubular shape (Figs. 2a-2d) and profile adjusting (rounding, Fig. 2E) in the same roller press after welding.
Regarding claim 7, Yamamoto teaches an algorithm (calculation and comparison) with the control unit (2) comprising an input (2a), a calculation unit (2b) and an output (2c; [0018]).
Regarding claim 8, Archer discloses outer rolls (26,24,16) and an inner roll (18) wherein at least a pushing means (10) is used to push the tube against the inner and outer rolls during rounding.
Regarding claim 9, Yamamoto teaches a laser (light beam) non-contact measurement device [0021].
Regarding claim 10, a tower or foundation is a tubular structure and Archer and Yamamoto are directed to producing tubular structures.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Archer (3,738,149) in view of Yamamoto et al. (JP 2006-272365) and further in view of Sato (2021/0023600). Archer does not disclose that the strip segment is comprised of multiple strip segments. Sato teaches forming a welded tube (1d) that is configured from an assembled blank comprising a plurality of metal strip segments [0051] which are tailor welded, stacked or laminated. It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to form the strip segment of Archer from a plurality of strip segments as taught by Sato in order to form a differential thickness or laminated tube structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD THOMAS TOLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5.
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, Chris Templeton can be reached at 571-272-4525. 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.
/EDWARD T TOLAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725