DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant has amended the claims to now recite “the first signal waves configured to bounce off one or more surfaces of the component”. Further search and consideration was required and new prior art, Feller US 7841243, will be used in combination with Wang 20220236197.
The other claim amendments “wherein the inspection device comprises: a plurality of configurable segments with a first end of the plurality of configurable segments coupled to a controller a probe with a first end coupled to a second end of the plurality of configurable segments: and a positioning assistant with a first end coupled to a second end of the probe and with a second end positioned at a distal end of the inspection device opposite the controller” are taught by cited prior art Wang US 20220236197. The rejection of these claim limitations can be seen below.
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 (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 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, 7, 8, 10-12, 14, 15, 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang US 20220236197 in view of Feller US 7841243.
As to claim 1, Wang teaches “An inspection system for in-situ identification of defects associated with a component of an assembled engine (Abstract), the inspection system (Figure 4, 110) comprising: an inspection device (Figure 4, 112), wherein the inspection device comprises: a plurality of configurable segments with a first end of the plurality of configurable segments (Figure 1, 122; [0037] teaches “For example, in some embodiments, a plurality of articulation cables 122 may be coupled between the probe tip 116 and one or more articulation motors 124. In such an embodiment, by adjusting the tension of the cables 122 via the motor(s) 124, the probe tip 116 may be reoriented within the gas turbine engine 10. In some embodiments, the articulation assembly 120 may be electronically controlled.”) coupled to a controller (Figure 1, 130; [0038] teaches “The scope monitor 130 can include one or more processors and one or more memory devices. The one or more processors of the scope monitor 130 can be used to determine the current location of the probe tip 116 within the gas turbine engine 10 using any suitable signal-based positioning technique, such as a trilateration technique or a triangulation technique. Additionally or alternatively, the signals received by the location signal receiver 126 can be transmitted to the scope monitor 130 and stored on the one or more memory devices. The signals or data containing such signals can be transmitted otherwise provided to a computing device for processing the current location of the probe tip 116. For instance, data containing such signals can be routed to an inspection assistant that can process the signals, and among other things, provide instructions to an operator based on current location of the probe tip 116.”; [0037] teaches that the articulation assembly 120 can be electronically controlled and this 120 is electronically attached to 130) a probe with a first end coupled to a second end of the plurality of configurable segments (Figure 1, 116): and a positioning assistant with a first end coupled to a second end of the probe and with a second end positioned at a distal end of the inspection device opposite the controller (Figure 1, 118 is a light source which aids in placing the probe in a desired location. Therefore it can be considered to be a positioning assistant), receive, via the inspection device, data associated with the one or more first signal waves (Abstract; [0006]; [0038]; Figure 4, 126 receives signals from location transmitters, which is a type of data); and apply an inspection process to the data to determine whether the component includes a defect (Abstract; [0005]).” Wang does not explicitly state that a controller via the inspection device generates signals.
Feller teaches “generate, via the inspection device (Figure 7, 42), one or more first signal waves in proximity to the component, the first signal waves configured to bounce off one or more surfaces of the component (Column 3, lines 46-53).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Feller with Wang. Utilizing signals to reflect off of surfaces is known in the art. Both art teach the generation of first signals, although they are different, but the concept of using the reflection to analyze the surface of a component is known in the art of non-destructive inspection. This allows for a probe to evaluate an area without direct contact of the surface it is inspecting.
As to claim 2, Feller teaches “wherein the inspection process is at least one of vibratory resonance or process compensated resonance testing (PCRT) (Figure 7; column 4, lines 18-23).”
As to claim 3, Wang teaches “wherein the inspection device is configured to be inserted through a port on an inner case of the assembled engine to access the component (Figure 4, 112 is inserted into access ports 62, 64 so that the 112 can be inserted into the gas engine).”
As to claim 4, Wang teaches “wherein the component is a blade of an integrally bladed rotor of the assembled engine ([0028]).”
As to claim 5, Wang teaches “wherein the probe further comprises: a plurality of signal generators configured to generate the one or more first signal waves in proximity to the component (Abstract; [0006]; [0038]; Figure 4, 126 receives signals from location transmitters, which is a type of data. A plurality of signal generators is taught with the location transmitters that communicate with probe 116. The probe itself does not physically contain these signal generators but do have a communicable relationship with the multiple location transmitters on the engine. Therefore the signal generators can be considered to be a part of the probe); and a signal receiver configured to receive one or more second signals associated with the one or more first signal waves and generate the data (Figure 4, 126).”
As to claim 7, Wang teaches “wherein the controller is configured to: position the distal end of the inspection device in the proximity to the component utilizing information received from the positioning assistant (Figure 4, 130).”
As to claim 8, Wang teaches “wherein the positioning assistant comprises at least one sensor and wherein the at least one sensor is a Hall effect sensor, an optical sensor, or a resolver (Figure 4, 130 has a screen; [0038]).”
As to claim 10, Wang teaches “wherein each segment of the plurality of configurable segments may be configured to be either rigid or flexible (Figure 4, 122; [0037]).”
As to claim 11, Wang teaches “An inspection device for in-situ identification of defects associated with a component of an assembled engine (Abstract; Figure 4), comprising: a plurality of configurable segments (Figure 4, 122; [0037]) with a first end of the plurality of configurable segments (Figure 1, 122; [0037] teaches “For example, in some embodiments, a plurality of articulation cables 122 may be coupled between the probe tip 116 and one or more articulation motors 124. In such an embodiment, by adjusting the tension of the cables 122 via the motor(s) 124, the probe tip 116 may be reoriented within the gas turbine engine 10. In some embodiments, the articulation assembly 120 may be electronically controlled.”) coupled to a controller (Figure 1, 130; [0038] teaches “The scope monitor 130 can include one or more processors and one or more memory devices. The one or more processors of the scope monitor 130 can be used to determine the current location of the probe tip 116 within the gas turbine engine 10 using any suitable signal-based positioning technique, such as a trilateration technique or a triangulation technique. Additionally or alternatively, the signals received by the location signal receiver 126 can be transmitted to the scope monitor 130 and stored on the one or more memory devices. The signals or data containing such signals can be transmitted otherwise provided to a computing device for processing the current location of the probe tip 116. For instance, data containing such signals can be routed to an inspection assistant that can process the signals, and among other things, provide instructions to an operator based on current location of the probe tip 116.”; [0037] teaches that the articulation assembly 120 can be electronically controlled and this 120 is electronically attached to 130), a probe (Figure 4, 116), with a first end coupled to a second end of the plurality of configurable segments (Figure 1): and receive data associated with the one or more first signals (Abstract; [0006]; [0038]; Figure 4, 126 receives signals from location transmitters, which is a type of data), and a positioning assistant with a first end coupled to a second end of the probe and with a second end positioned at a distal end of the inspection device opposite the controller controller (Figure 1, 118 is a light source which aids in placing the probe in a desired location. Therefore it can be considered to be a positioning assistant).” Wang does not explicitly state that a probe is configured to generate signals which bounce off of surfaces. This is implied since optical signals can bounce off of surfaces.
Feller teaches “wherein the probe is configured to: generate one or more first signal waves in proximity to the component the first signal waves configured to bounce off of one or more surfaces of the component (Column 3, lines 46-53).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Feller with Wang. Utilizing signals to reflect off of surfaces is known in the art. Both art teach the generation of first signals, although they are different, but the concept of using the reflection to analyze the surface of a component is known in the art of non-destructive inspection. This allows for a probe to evaluate an area without direct contact of the surface it is inspecting.
As to claim 12, Wang teaches “wherein the probe further comprises: a plurality of signal generators configured to generate the one or more first signal waves in proximity to the component (Abstract; [0006]; [0038]; Figure 4, 126 receives signals from location transmitters, which is a type of data. A plurality of signal generators is taught with the location transmitters that communicate with probe 116. The probe itself does not physically contain these signal generators but do have a communicable relationship with the multiple location transmitters on the engine. Therefore the signal generators can be considered to be a part of the probe); and a signal receiver configured to receive one or more second signals associated with the one or more first signal waves and generate the data (Figure 4, 126).”
As to claim 14, Wang teaches “wherein the positioning assistant provides information to position a distal end of the inspection device in the proximity to the component (Figure 4, 130 has a screen; [0038]).”
As to claim 15, Wang teaches “wherein the positioning assistant comprises at least one sensor and wherein the at least one sensor is a Hall effect sensor, an optical sensor, or a resolver (Figure 4, 130 has a screen; [0038]).”
As to claim 17, Wang teaches “wherein each segment of the plurality of configurable segments may be configured to be either rigid or flexible (Figure 4, 122; [0037]).”
As to claim 18, Bates teaches “wherein the inspection device is configured to couple to a controller mechanically, electrically, or communicatively (Figure 1 shows how the elements are connected).”
As to claim 19, Wang teaches “wherein the inspection device is configured to be inserted through a port on an inner case of the assembled engine to access the component (Figure 4, 112 is inserted into access ports 62, 64 so that the 112 can be inserted into the gas engine).”
As to claim 20, Wang teaches “wherein the component is a blade of an integrally bladed rotor of the assembled engine ([0028]).”
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 TARUN SINHA whose telephone number is (571)270-3993. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10AM-6PM 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, Laura Martin can be reached at (571) 272-2160. 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.
/TARUN SINHA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2863