DETAILED ACTION
In response to remarks filed on 15 August 2025
Status of Claims
Claims 1-10 are pending;
Claim 1 is currently amended;
Claims 2-10 were previously presented;
Claims 1-10 are rejected herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 15 August 2025 have been fully considered and the arguments regarding Radicioni were not found persuasive. First, the new limitations added by applicant necessitates the new grounds of rejection presented herein but they overcome the rejection using Van Vladeeren. However, regarding Radicioni, a monopile is a foundation made of a pipe/pile with a diameter inserted in the ground or seabed and a suction anchor is a foundation made of a pipe/pile with a diameter inserted in the ground by suction. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, a suction anchor can be interpreted as a monopile. The claim does not state that the top of the pile is located above water. Secondly, a “working platform” is a broad term. The claim does not state that the working platform supports equipment and personnel activities nor there is any mention of wind turbines. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation and given the lack of details associated with the platform in the claim, elements 2, 8 are being interpreted as a working platform. Furthermore, the claim does not state that the rotary connection mechanism is an integral, not detachable structure. Lastly, connections between elements may be indirect and terms like “on top” or “detachably fixed to”, “arranged on”, “connected to” do not necessarily mean direct contact connections. In order to find applicant’s arguments regarding Radicioni persuasive, the claim language should clearly recite the differences noted by applicant. Examiner is adding Duggal to address the new limitations as well in a new rejection.
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.
Claims 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duggal et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0001963) alone.
As to Claim 1, Duggal discloses a rotating construction platform based on a monopile, comprising a rotary connecting mechanism (330, 260, 415) arranged on a top of the monopile (Paragraph 0053: “The mooring support structure 115 can be a raised tower or other framed structure 315 and can include a base or jacket structure 316 that can be piled into the seafloor 140 or connected to the one or more pilings or piling foundations, not shown”) and a working platform (325, 405 grouped together) arranged on the rotary connecting mechanism (330, 260, 195), wherein the rotary connecting mechanism comprises an upper connecting tube (415), a lower connecting tube (330), and a rotary support structure (260) located between the upper connecting tube (415) and the lower connecting tube (330. The rotary support structure is connected in between upper connecting tube 415 and lower connecting tube 330), wherein the working platform (325, 405 grouped together) is fixedly connected to the upper connecting tube (415), and the lower connecting tube (330) is detachably fixed to the top of the monopile (Paragraph 0053: “The mooring support structure 115 can be a raised tower or other framed structure 315 and can include a base or jacket structure 316 that can be piled into the seafloor 140 or connected to the one or more pilings or piling foundations, not shown”), wherein at least one side of the working platform (325, 405 grouped together) sticks out of a side of the monopile (Figure 4), wherein the upper connectinq tube (415) rotates relative to the lower connectinq tube (330) throuqh the rotary support structure (260), thereby drivinq the workinq platform to rotate (Paragraph 0054: “In some embodiments, one or more additional decks, not shown, can be located above the turntable 260 and can be able to rotate with the turntable 260”), wherein the rotary support structure comprises two metallic seat rings (Paragraph 0054: “The turntable 260 can include one or more bearings 261. In some embodiments, the bearing 261 can be a roller bearing, a slide bearing, or any other suitable bearing. The bearing 261 can be metallic or synthetic”. Slide bearings are rings) that can rotate relative to each other.
Although Duggal does not describe the metallic seat rings as being made of steel, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that steel is a metallic material. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to make the seat rings of steel since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
As to Claim 2, Duggal as modified teaches the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Duggal as modified also teaches wherein the rotary connecting mechanism further comprises a plurality of corbels (577) fixedly connected to the upper connecting tube (415), and the working platform (325) is fixedly connected to the plurality of corbels (577).
As to Claim 3, Duggal as modified teaches the invention of Claim 2 (Refer to Claim 2 discussion). Duggal as modified also teaches wherein a plurality of horizontal braces (Left 340, Right 340) is fixedly arranged between the plurality of corbels (577) and the upper connecting tube (415).
As to Claim 4, Duggal as modified teaches the invention of Claim 2 (Refer to Claim 2 discussion). Duggal as modified also teaches wherein a load-bearing system of the working platform (24, 25) comprises a platform underframe (320), wherein the platform underframe (320) is fixedly connected with a plurality of short columns (Figure 4 shows a plurality of short columns), wherein each of the plurality of short columns is fixedly connected (Indirectly) to one of the plurality of corbels (577) of the rotary connecting mechanism.
As to Claim 5, Duggal as modified teaches the invention of Claim 4 (Refer to Claim 4 discussion). Duggal as modified also teaches wherein the platform underframe (320) is rectangular and sticks out of one side or two sides of the monopile (Figure 4) along a length direction, wherein the platform underframe (320) comprises a plurality of main beams (There’s a plurality of main beams in Figure 4. The thickest beams are the main beams) arranged along the length direction, a plurality of secondary beams (There’s a plurality of secondary beams in Figure 4. The thinnest beams are the secondary beams) arranged along a width direction, and a steel plate or grating (Floor of 320) installed on the plurality of main beams and the plurality of secondary beams, wherein the plurality of short columns is fixedly connected with the plurality of main beams (Figure 4).
As to Claim 6, Duggal as modified teaches the invention of Claim 4 (Refer to Claim 4 discussion). Duggal as modified also teaches wherein the load-bearing system of the working platform (325, 405 grouped together) further comprises a vertical reinforcement structure (316) fixedly connected with the platform underframe (320).
As to Claim 7, Duggal as modified teaches the invention of Claim 6 (Refer to Claim 6 discussion). Duggal as modified also teaches wherein the load-bearing system of the working platform (325, 405 grouped together) including the platform underframe (320) and the vertical reinforcement structure (316) is a frame structure, a truss structure (Figure 4), a self-stressed arch system or a cable-stayed structure.
As to Claim 8, Duggal as modified teaches the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Duggal as modified also teaches wherein the rotary connecting mechanism further comprises a rotary control system for controlling the rotation of the rotary support structure (Paragraph 0048: “To limit the rotational travel of the one or more turntables 260, the one or more turntables 260 can include mechanical stops, shock absorbers, springs, chains, cables, electric motors, hydraulic cylinders, or combinations thereof”).
As to Claim 9, Duggal as modified teaches the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Duggal as modified also teaches wherein a berthing and boarding structure (105) is provided at a side of the working platform.
As to Claim 10, Duggal as modified teaches the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Duggal as modified also teaches wherein the working platform (325, 405 grouped together) comprises a plurality of guardrails and a plurality of wheel guard sills installed on the platform underframe (Figure 4).
Claims 1, 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radicioni (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0386058) in view of Peppel (U.S. Patent No. 4,943,188).
As to Claim 1, Radicioni discloses a rotating construction platform based on a monopile, comprising a rotary connecting mechanism (13, 14, 16; Paragraph 0046: “The system 12 comprises a pull connector 16 adapted to constrain the coupling head 14 to the coupling seat 13, in a coupling region 17, so as to prevent the extraction of the coupling head 14 along the insertion direction 15 towards the detached position, but so as to allow rotations of the coupling head 14 with respect to the coupling seat 13 at least about axes transversal to the insertion direction 15”) arranged on a top of the monopile (10) and a working platform (2, 8) arranged on the rotary connecting mechanism (13, 14, 16), wherein the rotary connecting mechanism (13, 14, 16) comprises an upper connecting tube (14), a lower connecting tube (13), and a rotary support structure (16) located between the upper connecting tube (14) and the lower connecting tube (13), wherein the working platform (2, 8) is fixedly connected to the upper connecting tube (14), and the lower connecting tube (13) is detachably fixed to the top of the monopile (10), wherein at least one side of the working platform (2, 8) sticks out of a side of the monopile (Figure 1), wherein the upper connectinq tube (14) rotates relative to the lower connectinq tube (13) throuqh the rotary support structure (14), thereby drivinq the workinq platform (2, 8) to rotate.
However, Radicioni is silent about wherein the rotary support structure comprises two steel seat rings that can rotate relative to each other. Peppel discloses a rotary support structure (200, 208) comprising two steel rings (218, 280) that can rotate relative to each other. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the rotary support structure comprise two steel seat rings that can rotate relative to each other since the implementation of two steel seat rings that rotate relative to one another would have yielded the same and predictable result of providing a connection that allows rotation between elements.
As to Claim 8, Radicioni as modified teaches the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Radicioni as modified also teaches wherein the rotary connecting mechanism (13, 14, 16) further comprises a rotary control system (21) for controlling the rotation of the rotary support structure (16).
As to Claim 9, Radicioni as modified teaches the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Radicioni as modified also teaches wherein a berthing and boarding structure (6) is provided at a side of the working platform (2, 8).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 10:00AM to 6:00PM 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, AMBER ANDERSON can be reached at (571) 270-5281. 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.
/EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights