DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.
Therefore, the following claimed limitations (see below) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The claimed limitations not shown are:
“an interface connector” (see claim 7 line 3)
“a hoist connector” (see claim 8 line 2)
“a motion compensation mechanism” (claim 11 line 2)
“one or more actuators” (claim 11 line 4)
“a crane hook” (claim 14 line 3)
No new matter should be entered.
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 § 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 1-11 and 13 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, “its vertical orientation” (line 8) renders the claim indefinite because the limitation is unclear as to what claimed structure “its” refers to in the claim. Did Applicant mean -the vertical orientation of the blade-?
Regarding claim 4, “its vertical orientation” (line 5) renders the claim indefinite because the limitation is unclear as to what claimed structure “its” refers to in the claim. Did Applicant mean -the vertical orientation of the blade-?
Regarding claim 13, “its vertical orientation” (line 5) renders the claim indefinite because the limitation is unclear as to what claimed structure “its” refers to in the claim. Did Applicant mean -the vertical orientation of the blade-?
Please review all claims before the formal response is submitted, as any new 112(b) rejections introduced in the response may be grounds for a Final Rejection.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-7, and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Van den Berg (US Publication 2013/0125397 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Van den Berg (from here on just referred to as Berg) discloses a lifting device and method for positioning of an unwieldly object (see figures 1-6) comprising:
A wind turbine blade installation apparatus (see figures 1-6) for installing a wind turbine blade (5, see figures 1 and 6) onto a hub (18) of a wind turbine (9 and 10, see figure 6), the apparatus comprising:
a primary frame (4b, see figures 2-5) for supporting the wind turbine blade in a vertical orientation (see figures 1 and 6);
an interface (4f, see figures 2-5) for connecting the wind turbine blade to the primary frame (at least indirectly through the intermediate elements as shown in figures 2-5); and
a rigid connector (4a, see figures 2-5) for connecting the primary frame to an arm (2) of a crane (1), wherein the rigid connector forms a moveable coupling to the arm such that the primary frame is moveable between a first position (see figure 1, considered the position where the blade 5 is horizontal) for receiving the blade lifted by the crane, and a second position (see below) for holding a root of the blade in its vertical orientation above a head of the arm of the crane (As shown in figure 1, the root of the blade 5 is directed upwards. Further, as shown in figure 1, the blade is movable upward on the arm 2 in the displacement direction 11. Thus, the primary frame is movable to a second position holding a root of the blade in its vertical orientation above a head of the arm of the crane, once the primary frame is moved to its uppermost position on the arm and the root is directed upwards).
Regarding claim 4, Berg further shows a rotatable coupling (4e, see figures 2-3) provided between the interface and the primary frame, wherein the interface is rotatable via the rotatable coupling between a first position (see figure 1, considered the position where the blade 5 is horizontal) where the blade is supported in a horizontal orientation and a second position where the blade is in its vertical orientation (see second position as discussed in the rejection to claim 1).
Regarding claim 5, Berg further shows a slewing frame (4c and 4d) attached to the rotatable coupling for rotation relative to the primary frame.
Regarding claim 6, Berg further shows wherein the interface (4f) further comprises a locking mechanism (considered the winches 8, and holes & pins for connecting 4f to 6, as shown in figures 2-3) operable to releasably fix the blade to the interface (see figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 7, Berg further shows a carrier (6, see figures 2-5) for clamping to the blade, wherein the carrier comprises an interface connector (considered the fixing device as discussed in paragraph 0027) for connecting the blade to the interface.
Regarding claim 9, Berg further shows a carriage (4c and 4e, see figures 2-5) provided between the interface and the primary frame, wherein the carriage is slidably moveable for moving the interface between a first position (see figures 1 and 6) for receiving the blade lifted by the crane, and a second position (see second position as discussed in the rejection to claim 1) for elevating the root of the blade.
Regarding claim 10, Berg further shows a tilting mechanism (4d, see figure 2-5) provided between the interface (4f) and the primary frame (4a), wherein the tilting mechanism comprises one or more actuators (4d) for tilting the interface relative to the primary frame (see figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 11, Berg further shows a motion compensation mechanism (considered the stabilizing device of paragraph 0056) provided between the interface and the primary frame (as drive elements of the positioning device, for example actuators 4d, which is between interface 4f and primary frame 4b are actuated to reduce swaying, see paragraph 0056), wherein the motion compensation mechanism comprises one or more actuators (4d) for moving the interface relative to the primary frame.
Regarding claim 12, Berg discloses:
A method of installing a wind turbine blade (5) onto a hub (18) of a wind turbine (9 and 10, see figures 1-6),
the method comprising:
lifting the wind turbine blade using a crane (see figures 1 and 6);
connecting the blade to a primary frame (4b, see figures 2-5) via an interface (4f, see figures 2-5), wherein the primary frame is connected to the arm (see figures 2-5) of the crane via a rigid connector (4a, see figures 2-5) forming a moveable coupling (see figures 1-6);
moving the primary frame from a first position (see figure 1, considered the position where the blade 5 is horizontal) to a second position (see below) via the moveable coupling for holding a root of the blade in a vertical orientation above a head of the arm of the crane (As shown in figure 1, the root of the blade 5 is directed upwards. Further, as shown in figure 1, the blade is movable upward on the arm 2 in the displacement direction 11. Thus, the primary frame is movable to a second position holding a root of the blade in its vertical orientation above a head of the arm of the crane, once the primary frame is moved to its uppermost position on the arm and the root is directed upwards).
Regarding claim 13, Berg discloses:
The step of operating a rotatable coupling (4e, see figures 2-3, and 4e has a rotation axis 7a as shown in figures 2-3) provided between the interface and the primary frame (see figures 2-3) once the blade is connected (see paragraph 0031), wherein operation of the rotatable coupling rotates the blade from a first position (see figure 1, considered the position where the blade 5 is horizontal) where the blade is supported in a horizontal orientation to a second position (see second position as discussed in the rejection to claim 12) where the blade is in its vertical orientation.
Claims 1-2, 4, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Willim (US Patent 8,757,402 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Willim discloses a manipulator for the assembly of rotor blades of a wind power installation (see figures 5c and 5d) comprising:
A wind turbine blade installation apparatus (see figures 5c and 5d) for installing a wind turbine blade (see column 1 lines 5-11) onto a hub (see column 1 lines 5-11) of a wind turbine (see column 1 lines 5-11), the apparatus comprising:
a primary frame (102, see figures 5c and 5d) for supporting the wind turbine blade in a vertical orientation (the primary frame 102 supports the blade in the vertical orientation when the interface with the blade has been rotated 90 degrees from the position shown in figures 5c and 5d);
an interface (4, see figures 5c and 5d) for connecting the wind turbine blade to the primary frame (see figures 5c and 5d); and
a rigid connector (considered the pin connecting the primary frame 102 to adapter 101, see figures 5c and 5d) for connecting the primary frame to an arm (100 and 101, see figures 5c and 5d) of a crane (as 100 is a boom of a telescopic crane, see column 6 lines 6-29 and column 5 lines 49-51), wherein the rigid connector forms a moveable coupling to the arm such that the primary frame is moveable between a first position (see figures 5c and 5d) for receiving the blade lifted by the crane, and a second position (see below) for holding a root of the blade in its vertical orientation above a head of the arm of the crane (As shown in figures 5c and 5d, the primary frame 102 is above the head of the arm of the crane. Once the blade is held by the interface 4 in the horizontal position, the interface is rotated about swivel crown 70 ninety degrees to position the root of the blade over the head of the arm of the crane. Also, see column 1 lines 39-57.).
Regarding claim 2, Willim further shows wherein the rigid connector (considered the pin connecting the primary frame 102 to adapter 101, see figures 5c and 5d) forms a pivotable coupling with the crane arm (see figures 5c and 5d).
Regarding claim 4, Willim further shows a rotatable coupling (70, see figures 5c and 5d) provided between the interface (4) and the primary frame (102), wherein the interface is rotatable via the rotatable coupling between a first position (see figures 5c and 5d) where the blade is supported in a horizontal orientation and a second position where the blade is in its vertical orientation (see second position as discussed in the rejection to claim 1).
Regarding claim 12, Willim discloses:
A method of installing a wind turbine blade (see rotor blades in column 1 lines 5-11) onto a hub (see hub in column 1 lines 5-11) of a wind turbine (see wind power installation in column 1 lines 5-11),
the method comprising:
lifting the wind turbine blade using a crane (see column 1 lines 39-57);
connecting the blade to a primary frame (102, see figures 5c and 5d) via an interface (4, see figures 5c and 5d, column 6 lines 6-29, and column 1 lines 39-57), wherein the primary frame is connected to the arm (see figures 5c and 5d) of the crane via a rigid connector (considered the pin connecting the primary frame 102 to adapter 101, see figures 5c and 5d) forming a moveable coupling (see figures 5c and 5d);
moving the primary frame from a first position (see figures 5c and 5d) to a second position (see below) via the moveable coupling for holding a root of the blade in a vertical orientation above a head of the arm of the crane (As shown in figures 5c and 5d, the primary frame 102 is above the head of the arm of the crane. Once the blade is held by the interface 4 in the horizontal position, the interface is rotated about swivel crown 70 ninety degrees to position the root of the blade over the head of the arm of the crane. Also, see column 1 lines 39-57).
Regarding claim 13, Willim discloses:
The step of operating a rotatable coupling (70, see figures 5c and 5d) provided between the interface and the primary frame (see figures 5c and 5d) once the blade is connected (see column 6 lines 6-29), wherein operation of the rotatable coupling rotates the blade from a first position (see figures 5c and 5d) where the blade is supported in a horizontal orientation to a second position (see second position as discussed in the rejection to claim 12) where the blade is in its vertical orientation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 8 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berg (US Publication 2013/0125397 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Berg discloses that a positioning device (4, see figures 1-6) for a blade can be moved along the boom structure by means of a conventional hoisting means of a hoisting crane for example a cable and hook (i.e. hoist connector). See paragraph 0026.
Berg does not explicitly disclose wherein the carrier further comprises a hoist connector for attachment to a hoist rope of the crane for lifting the blade. Thus, the difference between Berg and this claim is that the hook is arranged on the positioning device and not on the carrier (6).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the lifting device of Berg by rearranging the location of the crane hook (i.e. hoist connector) from the positioning device to the carrier (i.e. rearrangement of parts), to improve lifting of the blade by positioning the hoisting rope closer to the center of gravity of the blade, to prevent the cable of the crane from being tangled between the crane arm and the positioning device, and/or to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Also, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 14, Berg discloses connecting the carrier (6) to the blade (see figures 1-6) and lifting the carrier to an elevated position for connecting the blade to the primary frame (see figures 2-5).
Berg does not explicitly disclose connecting a crane hook to a carrier. Thus, the difference between Berg and this claim is that the hook is arranged on the positioning device and not on the carrier (6).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the lifting device of Berg by rearranging the location of the crane hook (i.e. hoist connector) from the positioning device to the carrier (i.e. rearrangement of parts), to improve lifting of the blade by positioning the hoisting rope closer to the center of gravity of the blade, to prevent the cable of the crane from being tangled between the crane arm and the positioning device, and/or to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Also, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 15, Berg further shows releasably fixing the carrier to the interface using a locking mechanism (considered the winches 8, and holes & pins for connecting 4f to 6, as shown in figures 2-3) provided on the interface when the carrier is in the elevated position (see figures 2-5); and detaching the crane hook from the carrier (as the hook is released once the blade is lifted to the uppermost position on the crane arm).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Willim (US Patent 8,757,402 B2) in view of Botwright et al. (US Patent 8,070,000 B2).
Regarding claim 3, Willim discloses that the primary frame (102) is a luffing fly jib (see column 6 lines 21-29). Willim further discloses the pivoting mechanism for the luffing fly jib is a hydraulic cylinder (see column 6 lines 21-29). Willim further shows the primary frame (102) comprises a connector (considered the connector connected to the piston as shown in figures 5c and 5d).
Willim does not explicitly disclose a line connector for connecting the primary frame to a winch line, wherein retraction of the winch line pivots the primary frame about the pivotable coupling from the first position to the second position.
Thus, the difference between Willim and this claim is that the pivoting mechanism for the luffing fly jib in Willim is a hydraulic cylinder and not a winch with a winch line.
Botwright et al. (from here on just referred to as Botwright) discloses an apparatus (see figures 1-10, especially figure 2) and teaches of a winch (60, see figure 2) and a winchline (58) to adjust the angle of a luffing fly jib (38). See column 7 lines 50-61.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Willim by substituting a winches and winchlines as taught by Botwright for the hydraulic cylinders of Willim, and connecting the winchlines to the connectors of the primary frame instead of hydraulic cylinders, to utilize winches and winchlines for the pivoting mechanism of a luffing fly jib as taught by Botwright, to reduce the weight at the uppermost end of the boom arm as winchlines apply less weight than hydraulic cylinders, and/or as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
With the modification of Willim in view of Botwright, the retraction of the winch line pivots the primary frame about the pivotable coupling from the first position to the second position.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN J CAMPOS, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5229. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-6pm.
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, Robert W. Hodge can be reached on phone number (571)272-2097. 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.
/JJC/
/ROBERT W HODGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights