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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (claims 21 – 32), cancellation of Group II (Claims 33 – 39) and the traversal of the restriction between Group I (claims 21 – 32) and Group III (Claim 40) in the reply filed on 06/26/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground that the scope of the claimed invention of Group I (claims 21 – 32) substantially overlaps with the scope claimed invention of Group III (claim 40). This is found to be persuasive. Thus, claims 21 – 32 and 40 are currently pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21 – 32 and 40 of the current application No. 18/432,358 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 12 of U.S. Patent No. 11890704 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because clams of the current application No. 18/432,358 are anticipated by corresponding claims of U.S. Patent No. 11890704 B in the same row, as demonstrated the table inserted herein.
Claims of current app. No. 18/432,358
Claims of U.S. Patent No. 11890704 B2
Claim 21. A welding-type system, comprising:
a welding-type power supply configured to: provide welding-type output power to a welding-type torch and a wire feeder during a welding-type operation, and during a non-arc period, provide power to the wire feeder as a pulsed output signal; and a controller configured to: monitor the pulsed output signal of the welding-type power supply;
determine whether the wire feeder is activated or deactivated based on a change in the pulsed output signal; and control the welding-type power supply to adjust a pulse interval of the pulsed output signal from a first RMS value to a second RMS value by extending the pulse interval of a low voltage level of the second RMS value to achieve a predetermined threshold RMS range in response to a determination that the wire feeder is deactivated.
Claim 1. A welding-type system, comprising: a wire feeder configured to provide an electrode wire to a welding-type torch; and
a welding-type power supply configured to: provide welding-type output power to the welding-type torch and the wire feeder during a welding-type operation; and during a non-arc period, provide power to the wire feeder as a pulsed output signal, the welding-type power supply comprising a controller configured to: monitor the pulsed output signal of the welding-type power supply, the pulsed output signal to provide power sufficient to operate the wire feeder; calculate a change in the pulsed output signal to the wire feeder based on the monitored pulsed output signal; determine whether the wire feeder is activated or deactivated based on the change in the pulsed output signal to the wire feeder; and control the welding-type power supply to adjust a pulse interval of the pulsed output signal to the wire feeder from a first RMS value to a second RMS value that is within a predetermined threshold RMS range based on the determination that the wire feeder is deactivated by extending the pulse interval of a low voltage level of the second RMS value to achieve the predetermined threshold RMS range.(*Note- the underlined limitations of claim 1 anticipate claim 21)
Claim 22. The welding-type system of claim 21, wherein the controller is further configured to control the power supply to provide the pulsed output signal to operate the wire feeder based on a determination that the wire feeder is activated.
Claim 2. The welding-type system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to control a switched mode power supply to provide the pulsed output signal to operate the wire feeder based on a determination that the wire feeder is activated. (*Note- the underlined limitations of claim 2 anticipate claim 22)
Claim 23. The welding-type system of claim 22, wherein the controller is further configured to: control the power supply to provide a constant voltage output signal during the welding- type operation; and control the switched mode power supply to provide the pulsed output signal in response to completion of the welding type operation.
Claim 3. The welding-type system of claim 2, wherein the controller is further configured to: control the switched mode power supply to provide a constant voltage output signal during the welding-type operation; and control the switched mode power supply to provide the pulsed output signal in response to completion of the welding type operation. (*Note- the underlined limitations of claim 3 anticipate claim 23)
Claim 24. The welding-type system of claim 21, further comprising a calculation engine configured to compare the change in the pulsed output signal to a plurality of threshold output values.
Claim 4. The welding-type system of claim 1, further comprising a calculation engine configured to compare the change in the pulsed output signal to a plurality of threshold output values.
Claim 25. The welding-type system of claim 24, wherein the controller is further configured to identify an open circuit voltage condition at the power supply if the change exceeds a first threshold output level of the plurality of threshold output values.
Claim 5. The welding-type system of claim 4, wherein the controller is further configured to identify an open circuit voltage condition at the power supply if the change exceeds a first threshold output level of the plurality of threshold output values.
Claim 26. The welding-type system of claim 25, wherein an amount of adjustment to the pulse interval is based on the change.
Claim 6. The welding-type system of claim 5, wherein the amount of adjustment to the pulse interval is based on the change.
Claim 27. The welding-type system of claim 21, wherein the controller is further configured to deactivate the pulsed output signal in response to a determination that the power supply is not supplying power to the wire feeder.
Claim 7. The welding-type system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to deactivate the pulsed output signal in response to a determination that the wire feeder is not drawing power from the power supply.
Claim 28. The welding-type system of claim 21, wherein the power supply is a first power supply configured to provide power to generate an arc at the welding-type torch, and further comprising a second power supply configured to provide power to the wire feeder.
Claim 8. The welding-type system of claim 1, wherein the power supply is a first power supply configured to provide power to generate an arc at the welding-type torch, and further comprising a second power supply configured to provide power to the wire feeder.
Claim 29. The welding-type system of claim 21, wherein the controller is further configured to: monitor a time period of the change in the pulsed output signal; compare the time period to a plurality of threshold time periods stored in a memory; and adjust the pulsed output signal based on the comparison.
Claim 9. The welding-type system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to: monitor a time period of the calculated change in the pulsed output signal; compare the time period to a plurality of threshold time periods stored in a memory; and adjust the pulsed output signal based on the comparison. (*Note- the underlined limitations of claim 9 anticipate claim 29)
Claim 30. The welding-type system of claim 21, further comprising a network connection, wherein the controller is further configured to receive information regarding threshold values from a remote source via the network connection to update the plurality of thresholds in memory.
Claim 10. The welding-type system of claim 1, further comprising a network connection, wherein the controller is further configured to receive information regarding threshold values from a remote source via the network connection to update the plurality of thresholds in memory.
Claim 31. The welding-type system of claim 21, wherein the controller is further configured to adjust the pulse interval by adjusting a frequency of the pulsed output signal.
Claim 11. The welding-type system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to adjust the pulse interval by adjusting a frequency of the pulsed output signal.
Claim 32. The welding-type system of claim 31, wherein the controller is further configured to adjust the pulse interval by adjusting a length of one of a high voltage level or the low voltage level of the pulsed output corresponding to the second RMS value.
Claim 12. The welding-type system of claim 11, wherein the controller is further configured to adjust the pulse interval by adjusting a length of one of a high voltage level or the low voltage level of the pulsed output corresponding to the second RMS value.
Claim 40. A controller for controlling an output of a welding-type power supply to a wire feeder (anticipated by underlined limitation of claim 1),
the controller comprising a network connection configured to receive a feedback signal and transmit a control signal to the welding-type power supply (anticipated by underlined limitation of claim 10),
wherein the controller is configured to: monitor the feedback signal that is associated with a pulsed output signal output by the welding-type power supply to a wire feeder; determine whether the wire feeder is activated or deactivated based on a change in the pulsed output signal; and transmit a control signal to the welding-type power supply to adjust a pulse interval of the pulsed output signal from a first RMS value to a second RMS value by extending the pulse interval of a low voltage level of the second RMS value to achieve a predetermined threshold RMS range in response to a determination that the wire feeder is deactivated. (anticipated by the underlined limitations from claim 1).
Claim 1. … “a controller configured to: monitor the pulsed output signal of the welding-type power supply, the pulsed output signal to provide power sufficient to operate the wire feeder” …
Claim 10. The welding-type system of claim 1, further comprising a network connection, wherein the controller is further configured to receive information regarding threshold values from a remote source via the network connection to update the plurality of thresholds in memory.
Claim 1. …“a controller configured to: monitor the pulsed output signal of the welding-type power supply, the pulsed output signal to provide power sufficient to operate the wire feeder; determine whether the wire feeder is activated or deactivated based on the change in the pulsed output signal to the wire feeder; and control the welding-type power supply to adjust a pulse interval of the pulsed output signal to the wire feeder from a first RMS value to a second RMS value that is within a predetermined threshold RMS range based on the determination that the wire feeder is deactivated by extending the pulse interval of a low voltage level of the second RMS value to achieve the predetermined threshold RMS range. (Note- the underlined limitations claim 1 and claim 10 anticipate claim 40).
Claim Objections
Regarding claims 22, 23, 25, 27 and 28, these claims are objected to because of the following informalities: these claims recite “the power supply” in lines 2, 3, 2, 3 and 1 – 2 of the respective claims and should be “the welding-type power supply” to avoid antecedence issue. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding Claim 32, this claim recites the term “the pulsed output” in line 3 of the claim and should be “the pulsed output signal”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 3 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.
Regarding claim 23, this claim recites the term "the switch mode power supply" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term in the claim, rendering the claim indefinite.
Regrading claim 30, this claim recites the term “the plurality of thresholds in memory” in line 3 – 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term in the claim, rendering the claim indefinite.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21 – 32 and 40 would be allowable if rewritten or amended or a terminal disclaimer filed accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the Office action to overcome the claim objection(s), the indefiniteness rejection(s) and nonstatutory double patenting rejection rejection(s), set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the closest prior arts of record (Schartner, Daniel, Meckler and Hsu all recited in the IDS) failed to teach or reasonably suggest a controller configured to “transmit a control signal to the welding-type power supply to adjust a pulse interval of the pulsed output signal from a first RMS value to a second RMS value by extending the pulse interval of a low voltage level of the second RMS value to achieve a predetermined threshold RMS range in response to a determination that the wire feeder is deactivated.”
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Fujiwara (US 2018/0345399 A1), titled “Pulsed Arc Welding Control Method and Pulsed Arc Welding device”, discusses a pulse arc welding device control such that the welding current alternately repeats a peak current period in which the welding current is a peak current and a base current period in which the welding current is a base current smaller than the peak current, (0006).
Zucker et al. (US 2017/0120364 A1”, titled “System and Method of Communicating in a Welding System Over Welding Power Cables”, discusses having a welding power supply and wire feeder, where the power supply and wire feeder communicate over the welding power cables using current draw pulses which are generated and recognized by the power supply. Similarly, the power supply generates voltage pulses which are transmitted over the welding power cables and recognized by the wire feeder, (see abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DILNESSA B BELAY whose telephone number is (571)272-3136. The examiner can normally be reached M-F approx. 8:00 am - 5:30 pm 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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571)270-5095. 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.
/DILNESSA B BELAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/JOHN J NORTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights