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 .
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.
Claim Interpretation & Improper Amendments NOT ENTERED
Applicant is respectfully reminded that in the claim listing, the status of every claim must be indicated after its claim number by using one of the following identifiers in a parenthetical expression: (Original), (Currently amended), (Canceled), (Withdrawn), (Previously presented), (New), and (Not entered). See MPEP § 714(c). In the present case, Applicant provided two claim sets, with the longer claim set being provided before the shortened claim set. The Examiner respectfully requested clarification from the Applicant in the previous Office Action (12/10/2025; see page 12), and Applicant provided an indirect answer as to which claim set; namely, Applicant indicated claims for examination (inclusion of claims 10-13) that only existed in the older/longer claim set (09/11/2023; sixteen claims). In view of Applicant’s election and claim identifying response, the Examiner has marked the newer/shorter claim set dated 08/19/2024 (nine claims) as “DO NOT ENTER” in accordance therewith. The corresponding Specification & Abstract of the same date (08/19/2024) have likewise been marked as “DO NOT ENTER”. The Examiner identifies that the Claims, Specification, & Abstract dated 08/19/2024 appear to be that of copending application 18/460,083 (see also Electronic Filing System Acknowledgement Receipt of the same date so listing 18/460,083).
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s
election without traverse of Species 1 (fig. 1; claims 1-4 & 10-13)
in the reply filed on 12/10/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim(s) 5-9 and 14-16 is/are withdrawn
from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 09/11/2023 and 08/19/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the Examiner.
If Applicant seeks consideration of documents pertaining to a cited pending U.S. application—other than the specification (including the claims) and drawings of said application—Applicant must list such documents separately in the appropriately labeled section (e.g., for Office actions, Applicant should list such documents separately under the non-patent literature section, and for domestic or foreign patent literature, Applicant should list such patent literature under the appropriately corresponding sections). See MPEP § 609.04(a).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because unlabeled non-descriptive representations are impermissible under 37 CFR 1.83(a) which states (bold for emphasis):
(a) The drawing in a nonprovisional application must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. However, conventional features disclosed in the description and claims, where their detailed illustration is not essential for a proper understanding of the invention, should be illustrated in the drawing in the form of a graphical drawing symbol or a labeled representation (e.g., a labeled rectangular box). In addition, tables that are included in the specification and sequences that are included in sequence listings should not be duplicated in the drawings.
Element(s) 18 (load applying device), 3 (transceiver) of figs. 1-2 & 6-7, 18 & 2 (sonic probe) of fig. 5, and 2 of figs. 8-14 need appropriate legends in the form of descriptive text labels in addition to any reference characters already present. Empty or not labeled rectangular boxes and non-descriptive representations of features are not descriptive, and therefore incomplete. The descriptive text labels should contain as few words as possible. See also 37 CFR 1.84(n) (conventional symbols), 1.84(o) (required descriptive legends), & 1.84(p) (standards for the text labels), and MPEP § 608.02(b)(II)(¶ 6.22) (“descriptive text label”). Appropriate Correction is required.
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.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content, language, and/or format for an abstract of the disclosure:
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
use of phrases which can be implied (“of an embodiment”);
extensive mechanical/design details; and
insufficient assistant to the reader (Examiner suggests less mechanical details, and more details of the purpose/problem solved by the technical improvement).
Appropriate correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
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.
MPEP § 2173.05(b)(II):
A claim may be rendered indefinite by reference to an object that is variable. See, e.g., Ex parte Miyazaki, 89 USPQ2d 1207 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 2008) (precedential) and Ex parte Brummer, 12 USPQ2d 1653 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1989).
MPEP § 2173.02(I) states in part: “if the language of a claim, given its broadest reasonable interpretation, is such that a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art would read it with more than one reasonable interpretation, then a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph is appropriate”.
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are 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 independent claim 11,
the Examiner identifies that the claim is directed towards a “holder that holds a couplant including an elastomer and a sheet member” and “wherein the sheet member is partly fixed to the holder”, whereas it is unclear if the couplant should be interpreted as a required element thereof, and the Examiner further noting that the couplant appears for one possible interpretation to be merely a variable object which is referenced by the claim(s), and that the variability of said object renders said claim(s) indefinite, and in other interpretations the couplant or at least the sheet member thereof to be a required present element that is partly fixed thereto. Applicant clarification and appropriate amendment pertaining thereto is respectfully requested. To the best understanding of the Examiner and for the purpose of examination the Examiner assumes the narrower interpretation that the couplant including the elastomer and the sheet member is a requirement element and wherein the sheet member thereof is partly fixed to the holder.
Regarding claim 13,
similar to the analysis of claim 11, Applicant further claims that the “sheet member is bonded and fixed to a lower end surface of the base member”, whereas the claim is still directed to a holder and wherein it is still unclear if the couplant is a comprised element. Again, to the best understanding of the Examiner and for the purpose of examination the Examiner assumes the narrower interpretation that the couplant including the elastomer and the sheet member is a requirement element and that sheet member is bonded and fixed to a lower end surface of the base member.
Dependent claim(s) of rejected claim(s) is/are likewise rejected
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) 1-3 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant cited Hirao et al (US 20210123890 A1; hereafter “Hirao”) in view of Applicant cited Danicich et al (US 6412344 B1; hereafter “Danicich”).
PNG
media_image1.png
240
370
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
484
340
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 1,
Hirao teaches a sonic inspection device (fig. 16, acoustic inspection device 1) (Title; Abstract) comprising:
a sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) including a transducer (fig. 16, transducer 2) configured to execute at least one of transmission and reception of a sound wave, the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) having a sonic function surface (acoustic function surface of transducer 2) constituting at least one of a transmitting surface of the sound wave and a receiving surface of the sound wave (Abstract “acoustic transducer including a piezoelectric element having at least one of functions of transmitting and receiving acoustic waves, and having an acoustic function surface functioning as at least one of a transmitting surface and a receiving surface of acoustic waves”);
a couplant (fig. 16, couplant 4 with structure 12; see also figs. 3-4, as well as figs. 9-15, the Examiner notes these as analogous to some variations shown in instant figs. 15-19) that includes an elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) ([0035] “couplant 4 contains at least an elastomer”; [0043] “Examples of the thermoplastic elastomers that mainly form the couplants 4A and 4B include polystyrene-based thermoplastic elastomers (SBC, TPS), polyolefin-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPO), vinyl chloride-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPVC), polyurethane-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPU), polyester-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPEE, TPC), and polyamide-based thermoplastic elastomers, and so on. Examples of the thermosetting elastomers include: styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR), isoprene rubber (IR), butadiene rubber (BR), chloroprene rubber (CR), and acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (NBR), which are classified as a diene-based rubber; butyl rubber such as isobutylene-isoprene rubber (IIR), ethylene-propylene rubber (EPM), ethylene-propylene-diene rubber (EPDM), urethane rubber (U), silicone rubber, fluorine rubber (FKM), which are classified as a non-diene-based rubber; and other rubbers such as chlorosulfonated polyethylene (CSM), chlorinated polyethylene (CM), acrylic rubber (ACM), polysulfide rubber (T), epichlorohydrin rubber (CO, ECO), and the like. Since each material has characteristics such as heat resistance, abrasion resistance, oil resistance, chemical resistance, and so on, it is preferable to select the material appropriately depending on an inspection object”) and a sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) containing a polymer and having a plurality of openings (mesh apertures of structure 12) ([0050] “nylon meshes”; [0045] “planar shape of the uneven structure 12 of each of the couplants 4A and 4B is not particularly limited. For example, a planar shape with intersecting vertical and horizontal bar-shaped projections 18 is exemplified as illustrated in FIG. 9, FIG. 10, and FIG. 11. In the couplant 4A illustrated in FIG. 3 and FIG. 4, a member where vertical and horizontal bar-shaped protruding members 14 are woven into a mesh may be applied. In this case, the planar shape is also the intersecting vertical and horizontal bar-shaped projections 18 illustrated in FIG. 11. In FIG. 11, black-painted parts are the protruding parts 14, 16, and white-painted parts therebetween are the recessed parts 17. This is also the case in FIG. 12 through FIG. 15. The planar shapes of the protruding parts 14 illustrated in FIG. 3 and FIG. 4 and the protruding parts 16 illustrated in FIG. 5 and FIG. 6 can be applied to both the protruding parts 14 and the protruding parts 16 as viewed from the normal direction of the surface 4b of the couplant 4 with the uneven structure 12, although there is a difference in whether the protruding part is formed by the protruding members 14 or parts of the couplant body 13 itself”), the elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) having a first surface (first surface of couplant 4) that comes into contact with the sonic function surface (acoustic function surface of transducer 2) of the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) directly through an intermediate member (fig. 16, shoe 3) (Abstract “intermediate member therebetween on the acoustic function surface”; [0030] “acoustic transducer 2 having at least one of the functions of transmitting and receiving acoustic waves is mounted on a shoe (intermediate member) 3”) and a second surface (second surface of couplant 4) opposite the first surface (first surface of couplant 4), and the sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) being stacked with the elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) while in contact with the second surface (second surface of couplant 4);
wherein the couplant (fig. 16, couplant 4 with structure 12) is attached indirectly to the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2), and wherein the sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) is at least partly located at an outermost surface under no load condition or under loaded condition; and
a loading mechanism (fig. 16, pressure applying member 20) that applies a load to the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) ([0048] “a pressure-applying member 20 of a mechanical, hydraulic, pneumatic, electromagnetic or other actuator may be thrust against the shoe 3, and a load may be applied directly from the pressure-applying member 20 to the shoe 3, to thereby apply the load to the couplant 4. As illustrated in FIG. 17, when the couplant 4 is provided directly on the acoustic function surface 9b of the acoustic probe 2 without an intermediate member such as the shoe 3, the pressure-applying member 20 of the actuator may be thrust against the acoustic probe 2 to apply the load to the couplant 4. The loading mechanism for the couplant 4 is required to be switchable between a state where the load is applied to the couplant 4 and a state where the load is removed, and a concrete method of applying the load, shape of the applying member, and the like are not particularly limited”).
The Examiner notes with respect to the above teachings being shown in different figures (especially, the details of structure 12), that while the reference does not expressly show all of the above claimed features clearly in a single depicted embodiment as a single figure, either one of ordinary skill in the art would at once envisaged the
combination from the generic teachings thereof and/or specific possible choices of the structural components
thereof, or, in the alternative, it at least would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to nevertheless so combine the above features for the
purpose and combinations as proposed by said reference and as analyzed by the Examiner
including the citations and/or Examiner comments provided above in reference to the claimed features.
Pertinently, the Examiner further notes that "Combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness", see Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. v. Cordis Corp., 554 F.3d 982, 991 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Additionally with respect to the sizing and shape of sheet: legal precedent has condoned the use of particular examples of what may be considered common sense or ordinary routine practice including changes in shape, see MPEP § 2141(I) & 2144.04(IV)(B), and In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966); and it has been held that a mere change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, see MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(A), In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCP A 1955), In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976), and Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). In the present case it is the Examiner’s position that either Hirao reasonably teaches a planar (sheet) shape structure for the embodiment of fig. 16, or, nevertheless or in the alternative It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to shape/size Hirao’s structure to be a planar sheet—as suggested by Hirao in the aforementioned other figures and accompanying text—thereby providing the expected advantages of reduced material cost and/or ease through which pressure can be exerted to force the elastomer to contact the object of inspection through the apertures of the planar sheet. Additionally, with respect to the material, 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, see MPEP § 2144.07 and In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). In the present case it is the Examiner’s position that only ordinary skill in the art is required to choose an elastic material for Hirao’s first couplant (4) and a polymeric material for Hirao’s second couplant (12)—as suggested by Hirao in the aforementioned other figures and accompanying text—thereby providing the expected advantages of promoting ultrasonic waves to transmit through the (first) couplant in a loaded state, while allowing for low frictional forces on the outer structure (12) of the couplant (4 & 12) to adjust the inspection position in a non-loaded state.
Hirao does not teach a holder that holds the couplant to attach the couplant to the sonic probe and to which the sheet member is partly fixed.
Danicich teaches a sonic inspection device (figs. 1-2, sensor 10) (shown in figs. 1-8; Title; Abstract; col 1., ll. 5-9 “by emitting and detecting ultrasonic pulses”) comprising: a sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) including a transducer (figs. 2-3, transducer 40) configured to execute at least one of transmission and reception of a sound wave, the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) having a sonic function surface (ultrasonic functional surface of transducer 40) constituting at least one of a transmitting surface of the sound wave and a receiving surface of the sound wave (col. 2 line 66 through col. 3 line 13 “a transducer 40 having a pulse source (not shown) that generates elastic wave pulses (such as ultrasonic pulses) and an echo detector (not shown) that detects elastic wave pulses (such as ultrasonic pulses). As used herein, the term "transducer" refers to a device that is capable of transmitting and/or receiving elastic or ultrasound pulses. The transducer typically uses a piezoelectric element to send out wave pulses and to detect wave pulses. Transducers are typically either "single type" and "array type" transducers. A "single type" transducer has a single ultrasound transducer while an "array type" transducer has a plurality of ultrasound transducers arranged either in a line or in a matrix array. Both single and array type transducers, as well as other types of transducers, can be used in the present invention"); a couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) that includes an elastomer (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) (col. 3, ll. 13-31 “couplant 42 may be made from a wide variety of materials including, but not limited to, elastomers, rubber, or compliant, encapsulated epoxy materials. The dry couplant 42 is preferably made of a rubber-like material sold under the name AQUALENE.TM. sold by Materials Research Institute of Ontario, Canada, or RO-CEE RUBBER.TM. sold by NDT International of West Chester, Pa.”) and a couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) containing a polymer (col. 3, ll. 31-43 “transition portion 26 is preferably made of a polymer, such as nylon, acrylic, or polycarbonate, although other materials such as metals, ceramics, or others may be used without departing from the scope of the invention"), the elastomer (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) having a first surface (first surface of couplant 42) that comes into contact with the sonic function surface (ultrasonic functional surface of transducer 40) of the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) and a second surface (second surface of couplant 42) opposite the first surface (first surface of couplant 42), and the couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) being stacked with the elastomer (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) while in contact with the second surface (second surface of couplant 42); a holder (figs. 2-3, base 20 with guide 60) that holds the couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) to attach the couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) to the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) and to which the couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) is partly fixed while the couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) is at least partly located at an outermost surface under no load condition or under loaded condition; and a loading mechanism (figs. 2-3, mechanism comprising transducer spring 56) that applies a load to the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Danicich’s holder for an ultrasonic probe with Hirao’s ultrasonic probe thereby providing the expected advantages of structurally supporting the ultrasonic probe including the coupling portion thereof in a convenient manner that can be easily mounted, and yet still be disassembled for purposes of repair and/or replacement of parts. Complimentarily, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hirao’s ultrasonic probe design comprising an intermediate member & an outer friction reducing coupling apertured sheet & an actuatable thrusting bias with Danicich’s device thereby providing the advantage of friction reduction (via Hirao’s apertured sheet) while adjusting sensor location while still maintaining both proper coupling (via Hirao’s intermediate member) of the ultrasonic waves into the object and with sufficient waveguide intermediate the transducer and the object for proper transceiving and controllable biasing (via Hirao’s actuator). The Examiner additionally notes that the Courts have ruled an obviousness analysis based on the collective teachings of the references does not depend on the order in which the references are listed in the statement of the rejection. See In re Bush, 296 F.2d 491, 496 (CCPA 1961): “In a case of this type where a rejection is predicated on two references each containing pertinent disclosure which has been pointed out to the applicant, we deem it to be of no significance, but merely a matter of exposition, that the rejection is stated to be on A in view of B instead of on B in view of A, or to term one reference primary and the other secondary.”
Therefore, the combination of prior art reasonably suggests a holder (Danicich: base 20 with guide 60) that holds the couplant (Hirao: couplant 4 with structure 12) to attach (through Hirao’s intermediate shoe 3) the couplant (Hirao: couplant 4 with structure 12) to the sonic probe (Hirao: probe comprising transducer 2) and to which the sheet member (Hirao: fig. 16, structure 12) is partly fixed while the sheet member (Hirao: fig. 16, structure 12) is at least partly located at an outermost surface (outermost surface of Danicich’s base 20) under no load condition or under loaded condition (Hirao: pressure-applying member of the actuator thrusted or not to apply load).
Regarding method claim 10, which depends on apparatus claim 1,
Hirao teaches a sonic inspection method using a sonic inspection device (fig. 16, acoustic inspection device 1) (Title; Abstract), the sonic inspection device (fig. 16, acoustic inspection device 1) comprising:
a sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) including a transducer (fig. 16, transducer 2) configured to execute at least one of transmission and reception of a sound wave, the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) having a sonic function surface (acoustic function surface of transducer 2) constituting at least one of a transmitting surface of the sound wave and a receiving surface of the sound wave (Abstract “acoustic transducer including a piezoelectric element having at least one of functions of transmitting and receiving acoustic waves, and having an acoustic function surface functioning as at least one of a transmitting surface and a receiving surface of acoustic waves”);
a couplant (fig. 16, couplant 4 with structure 12; see also figs. 3-4, as well as figs. 9-15, the Examiner notes these as analogous to some variations shown in instant figs. 15-19) that includes an elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) ([0035] “couplant 4 contains at least an elastomer”; [0043] “Examples of the thermoplastic elastomers that mainly form the couplants 4A and 4B include polystyrene-based thermoplastic elastomers (SBC, TPS), polyolefin-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPO), vinyl chloride-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPVC), polyurethane-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPU), polyester-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPEE, TPC), and polyamide-based thermoplastic elastomers, and so on. Examples of the thermosetting elastomers include: styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR), isoprene rubber (IR), butadiene rubber (BR), chloroprene rubber (CR), and acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (NBR), which are classified as a diene-based rubber; butyl rubber such as isobutylene-isoprene rubber (IIR), ethylene-propylene rubber (EPM), ethylene-propylene-diene rubber (EPDM), urethane rubber (U), silicone rubber, fluorine rubber (FKM), which are classified as a non-diene-based rubber; and other rubbers such as chlorosulfonated polyethylene (CSM), chlorinated polyethylene (CM), acrylic rubber (ACM), polysulfide rubber (T), epichlorohydrin rubber (CO, ECO), and the like. Since each material has characteristics such as heat resistance, abrasion resistance, oil resistance, chemical resistance, and so on, it is preferable to select the material appropriately depending on an inspection object”) and a sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) containing a polymer and having a plurality of openings (mesh apertures of structure 12) ([0050] “nylon meshes”; [0045] “planar shape of the uneven structure 12 of each of the couplants 4A and 4B is not particularly limited. For example, a planar shape with intersecting vertical and horizontal bar-shaped projections 18 is exemplified as illustrated in FIG. 9, FIG. 10, and FIG. 11. In the couplant 4A illustrated in FIG. 3 and FIG. 4, a member where vertical and horizontal bar-shaped protruding members 14 are woven into a mesh may be applied. In this case, the planar shape is also the intersecting vertical and horizontal bar-shaped projections 18 illustrated in FIG. 11. In FIG. 11, black-painted parts are the protruding parts 14, 16, and white-painted parts therebetween are the recessed parts 17. This is also the case in FIG. 12 through FIG. 15. The planar shapes of the protruding parts 14 illustrated in FIG. 3 and FIG. 4 and the protruding parts 16 illustrated in FIG. 5 and FIG. 6 can be applied to both the protruding parts 14 and the protruding parts 16 as viewed from the normal direction of the surface 4b of the couplant 4 with the uneven structure 12, although there is a difference in whether the protruding part is formed by the protruding members 14 or parts of the couplant body 13 itself”), the elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) having a first surface (first surface of couplant 4) that comes into contact with the sonic function surface (acoustic function surface of transducer 2) of the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) directly through an intermediate member (fig. 16, shoe 3) (Abstract “intermediate member therebetween on the acoustic function surface”; [0030] “acoustic transducer 2 having at least one of the functions of transmitting and receiving acoustic waves is mounted on a shoe (intermediate member) 3”) and a second surface (second surface of couplant 4) opposite the first surface (first surface of couplant 4), and the sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) being stacked with the elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) while in contact with the second surface (second surface of couplant 4);
wherein the couplant (fig. 16, couplant 4 with structure 12) is attached indirectly to the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2), and wherein the sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) is at least partly located at an outermost surface under no load condition or under loaded condition; and
a loading mechanism (fig. 16, pressure applying member 20) that applies a load to the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) ([0048] “a pressure-applying member 20 of a mechanical, hydraulic, pneumatic, electromagnetic or other actuator may be thrust against the shoe 3, and a load may be applied directly from the pressure-applying member 20 to the shoe 3, to thereby apply the load to the couplant 4. As illustrated in FIG. 17, when the couplant 4 is provided directly on the acoustic function surface 9b of the acoustic probe 2 without an intermediate member such as the shoe 3, the pressure-applying member 20 of the actuator may be thrust against the acoustic probe 2 to apply the load to the couplant 4. The loading mechanism for the couplant 4 is required to be switchable between a state where the load is applied to the couplant 4 and a state where the load is removed, and a concrete method of applying the load, shape of the applying member, and the like are not particularly limited”),
the method comprising:
placing the sonic inspection device (fig. 16, acoustic inspection device 1) on an object (fig. 16, inspection object X) to be inspected;
applying a load (via pressure applying member 20) to the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) to press the elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) to bring the elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) into contact with the object through the sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) ([0048] “pressure-applying member 20 of a mechanical, hydraulic, pneumatic, electromagnetic or other actuator” and “a load may be applied directly from the pressure-applying member 20” and “The loading mechanism for the couplant 4 is required to be switchable between a state where the load is applied to the couplant 4 and a state where the load is removed, and a concrete method of applying the load, shape of the applying member, and the like are not particularly limited”)
performing a sonic nondestructive inspection of the object using the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) while pressing the elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) against the object (fig. 16, inspection object X); and
removing the load (via pressure applying member 20) applied to the couplant (fig. 16, couplant 4 with structure 12) and moving the sonic inspection device (fig. 16, acoustic inspection device 1) on the object (fig. 16, inspection object X) while keeping the sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) in contact with the object (fig. 16, inspection object X) ([0038] “when the load is not applied, the protruding members (protruding parts) 14 with the large elastic modulus are in contact with the inspection target X and the couplant body 13 containing the elastomer is not in contact with the inspection target X as illustrated in FIG. 7A, so it can be moved with small frictional force. When the load is applied, the couplant body 13 containing the elastomer deforms and protrudes between the protruding members (protruding parts) 14, as illustrated in FIG. 7B, causing the couplant body 13 to be in contact with the inspection target X. Thus, acoustic waves can be propagated efficiently”; see also Tables 1 & 2 pertaining to materials, modulus, and friction; Examiner further notes the problem solved as put forth in [0004] “to slide the couplant for the acoustic inspection”).
The Examiner notes with respect to the above teachings being shown in different figures (especially, the details of structure 12), that while the reference does not expressly show all of the above claimed features clearly in a single depicted embodiment as a single figure, either one of ordinary skill in the art would at once envisaged the combination from the generic teachings thereof and/or specific possible choices of the structural components thereof, or, in the alternative, it at least would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to nevertheless so combine the above features for the purpose and combinations as proposed by said reference and as analyzed by the Examiner including the citations and/or Examiner comments provided above in reference to the claimed features. Pertinently, the Examiner further notes that "Combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness", see Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. v. Cordis Corp., 554 F.3d 982, 991 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Additionally with respect to the sizing and shape of sheet: legal precedent has condoned the use of particular examples of what may be considered common sense or ordinary routine practice including changes in shape, see MPEP § 2141(I) & 2144.04(IV)(B), and In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966); and it has been held that a mere change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, see MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(A), In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCP A 1955), In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976), and Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). In the present case it is the Examiner’s position that either Hirao reasonably teaches a planar (sheet) shape structure for the embodiment of fig. 16, or, nevertheless or in the alternative It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to shape/size Hirao’s structure to be a planar sheet—as suggested by Hirao in the aforementioned other figures and accompanying text—thereby providing the expected advantages of reduced material cost and/or ease through which pressure can be exerted to force the elastomer to contact the object of inspection through the apertures of the planar sheet. Additionally, with respect to the material, 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, see MPEP § 2144.07 and In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). In the present case it is the Examiner’s position that only ordinary skill in the art is required to choose an elastic material for Hirao’s first couplant (4) and a polymeric material for Hirao’s second couplant (12)—as suggested by Hirao in the aforementioned other figures and accompanying text—thereby providing the expected advantages of promoting ultrasonic waves to transmit through the (first) couplant in a loaded state, while allowing for low frictional forces on the outer structure (12) of the couplant (4 & 12) to adjust the inspection position in a non-loaded state.
Hirao does not teach a holder that holds the couplant to attach the couplant to the sonic probe and to which the sheet member is partly fixed.
Danicich teaches a sonic inspection method using a sonic inspection device (figs. 1-2, sensor 10) (shown in figs. 1-8; Title; Abstract; col 1., ll. 5-9 “by emitting and detecting ultrasonic pulses”), the sonic inspection device (figs. 1-2, sensor 10) comprising: a sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) including a transducer (figs. 2-3, transducer 40) configured to execute at least one of transmission and reception of a sound wave, the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) having a sonic function surface (ultrasonic functional surface of transducer 40) constituting at least one of a transmitting surface of the sound wave and a receiving surface of the sound wave (col. 2 line 66 through col. 3 line 13 “a transducer 40 having a pulse source (not shown) that generates elastic wave pulses (such as ultrasonic pulses) and an echo detector (not shown) that detects elastic wave pulses (such as ultrasonic pulses). As used herein, the term "transducer" refers to a device that is capable of transmitting and/or receiving elastic or ultrasound pulses. The transducer typically uses a piezoelectric element to send out wave pulses and to detect wave pulses. Transducers are typically either "single type" and "array type" transducers. A "single type" transducer has a single ultrasound transducer while an "array type" transducer has a plurality of ultrasound transducers arranged either in a line or in a matrix array. Both single and array type transducers, as well as other types of transducers, can be used in the present invention"); a couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) that includes an elastomer (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) (col. 3, ll. 13-31 “couplant 42 may be made from a wide variety of materials including, but not limited to, elastomers, rubber, or compliant, encapsulated epoxy materials. The dry couplant 42 is preferably made of a rubber-like material sold under the name AQUALENE.TM. sold by Materials Research Institute of Ontario, Canada, or RO-CEE RUBBER.TM. sold by NDT International of West Chester, Pa.”) and a couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) containing a polymer (col. 3, ll. 31-43 “transition portion 26 is preferably made of a polymer, such as nylon, acrylic, or polycarbonate, although other materials such as metals, ceramics, or others may be used without departing from the scope of the invention"), the elastomer (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) having a first surface (first surface of couplant 42) that comes into contact with the sonic function surface (ultrasonic functional surface of transducer 40) of the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) and a second surface (second surface of couplant 42) opposite the first surface (first surface of couplant 42), and the couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) being stacked with the elastomer (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) while in contact with the second surface (second surface of couplant 42); a holder (figs. 2-3, base 20 with guide 60) that holds the couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) to attach the couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) to the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) and to which the couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) is partly fixed while the couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) is at least partly located at an outermost surface under no load condition or under loaded condition; and a loading mechanism (figs. 2-3, mechanism comprising transducer spring 56) that applies a load to the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40), the method comprising placing the sonic inspection device (figs. 1-2, sensor 10) on an object (fig. 1, vessel 14) to be inspected; applying a load (via mechanism comprising transducer spring 56) to the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) to press the couplant (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) into contact with the object (fig. 1, vessel 14); performing a sonic nondestructive inspection of the object (fig. 1, vessel 14) using the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) while pressing the couplant (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) against the object (fig. 1, vessel 14); and removing the load (via mechanism comprising transducer spring 56) applied to the couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) and moving the sonic inspection device (figs. 1-2, sensor 10) (in a non-preferred yet still reasonably taught embodiment the base 20 is not permanently attached to object so as be able to replace/service, see col. 10 line 52 through col. 11 line 15 “The sensor 10 of the present invention is easily uncoupled from the vessel 14 should any component of the sensor (such as the transducer 40) require replacement or servicing”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Danicich’s holder for an ultrasonic probe with Hirao’s ultrasonic probe thereby providing the expected advantages of structurally supporting the ultrasonic probe including the coupling portion thereof in a convenient manner that can be easily mounted together, and yet still be disassembled for purposes of repair and/or replacement of parts. Complimentarily, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hirao’s slidable inspection method and associated ultrasonic probe design comprising an intermediate member & an outer friction reducing coupling apertured sheet & an actuatable thrusting bias with Danicich’s device thereby providing the advantage of friction reduction (via Hirao’s apertured sheet) while adjusting sensor location while still maintaining both proper coupling (via Hirao’s intermediate member) of the ultrasonic waves into the object and with sufficient waveguide intermediate the transducer and the object for proper transceiving and controllable biasing (via Hirao’s actuator). The Examiner additionally notes that the Courts have ruled an obviousness analysis based on the collective teachings of the references does not depend on the order in which the references are listed in the statement of the rejection. See In re Bush, 296 F.2d 491, 496 (CCPA 1961): “In a case of this type where a rejection is predicated on two references each containing pertinent disclosure which has been pointed out to the applicant, we deem it to be of no significance, but merely a matter of exposition, that the rejection is stated to be on A in view of B instead of on B in view of A, or to term one reference primary and the other secondary.” See also analysis of independent claim 1.
Regarding independent claim 11, as best understood,
Hirao teaches a sonic inspection device (fig. 16, acoustic inspection device 1) (Title; Abstract) comprising:
a sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) including a transducer (fig. 16, transducer 2) configured to execute at least one of transmission and reception of a sound wave, the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) having a sonic function surface (acoustic function surface of transducer 2) constituting at least one of a transmitting surface of the sound wave and a receiving surface of the sound wave (Abstract “acoustic transducer including a piezoelectric element having at least one of functions of transmitting and receiving acoustic waves, and having an acoustic function surface functioning as at least one of a transmitting surface and a receiving surface of acoustic waves”);
a couplant (fig. 16, couplant 4 with structure 12; see also figs. 3-4, as well as figs. 9-15, the Examiner notes these as analogous to some variations shown in instant figs. 15-19) that includes an elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) ([0035] “couplant 4 contains at least an elastomer”; [0043] “Examples of the thermoplastic elastomers that mainly form the couplants 4A and 4B include polystyrene-based thermoplastic elastomers (SBC, TPS), polyolefin-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPO), vinyl chloride-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPVC), polyurethane-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPU), polyester-based thermoplastic elastomers (TPEE, TPC), and polyamide-based thermoplastic elastomers, and so on. Examples of the thermosetting elastomers include: styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR), isoprene rubber (IR), butadiene rubber (BR), chloroprene rubber (CR), and acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (NBR), which are classified as a diene-based rubber; butyl rubber such as isobutylene-isoprene rubber (IIR), ethylene-propylene rubber (EPM), ethylene-propylene-diene rubber (EPDM), urethane rubber (U), silicone rubber, fluorine rubber (FKM), which are classified as a non-diene-based rubber; and other rubbers such as chlorosulfonated polyethylene (CSM), chlorinated polyethylene (CM), acrylic rubber (ACM), polysulfide rubber (T), epichlorohydrin rubber (CO, ECO), and the like. Since each material has characteristics such as heat resistance, abrasion resistance, oil resistance, chemical resistance, and so on, it is preferable to select the material appropriately depending on an inspection object”) and a sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) containing a polymer and having a plurality of openings (mesh apertures of structure 12) ([0050] “nylon meshes”; [0045] “planar shape of the uneven structure 12 of each of the couplants 4A and 4B is not particularly limited. For example, a planar shape with intersecting vertical and horizontal bar-shaped projections 18 is exemplified as illustrated in FIG. 9, FIG. 10, and FIG. 11. In the couplant 4A illustrated in FIG. 3 and FIG. 4, a member where vertical and horizontal bar-shaped protruding members 14 are woven into a mesh may be applied. In this case, the planar shape is also the intersecting vertical and horizontal bar-shaped projections 18 illustrated in FIG. 11. In FIG. 11, black-painted parts are the protruding parts 14, 16, and white-painted parts therebetween are the recessed parts 17. This is also the case in FIG. 12 through FIG. 15. The planar shapes of the protruding parts 14 illustrated in FIG. 3 and FIG. 4 and the protruding parts 16 illustrated in FIG. 5 and FIG. 6 can be applied to both the protruding parts 14 and the protruding parts 16 as viewed from the normal direction of the surface 4b of the couplant 4 with the uneven structure 12, although there is a difference in whether the protruding part is formed by the protruding members 14 or parts of the couplant body 13 itself”), the elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) having a first surface (first surface of couplant 4) that comes into contact with the sonic function surface (acoustic function surface of transducer 2) of the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) directly through an intermediate member (fig. 16, shoe 3) (Abstract “intermediate member therebetween on the acoustic function surface”; [0030] “acoustic transducer 2 having at least one of the functions of transmitting and receiving acoustic waves is mounted on a shoe (intermediate member) 3”) and a second surface (second surface of couplant 4) opposite the first surface (first surface of couplant 4), and the sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) being stacked with the elastomer (fig. 16, couplant 4) while in contact with the second surface (second surface of couplant 4);
wherein the couplant (fig. 16, couplant 4 with structure 12) is attached indirectly to the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2), and wherein the sheet member (fig. 16, structure 12) is at least partly located at an outermost surface under no load condition or under loaded condition; and
a loading mechanism (fig. 16, pressure applying member 20) that applies a load to the sonic probe (fig. 16 probe comprising transducer 2) ([0048] “a pressure-applying member 20 of a mechanical, hydraulic, pneumatic, electromagnetic or other actuator may be thrust against the shoe 3, and a load may be applied directly from the pressure-applying member 20 to the shoe 3, to thereby apply the load to the couplant 4. As illustrated in FIG. 17, when the couplant 4 is provided directly on the acoustic function surface 9b of the acoustic probe 2 without an intermediate member such as the shoe 3, the pressure-applying member 20 of the actuator may be thrust against the acoustic probe 2 to apply the load to the couplant 4. The loading mechanism for the couplant 4 is required to be switchable between a state where the load is applied to the couplant 4 and a state where the load is removed, and a concrete method of applying the load, shape of the applying member, and the like are not particularly limited”).
The Examiner notes with respect to the above teachings being shown in different figures (especially, the details of structure 12), that while the reference does not expressly show all of the above claimed features clearly in a single depicted embodiment as a single figure, either one of ordinary skill in the art would at once envisaged the
combination from the generic teachings thereof and/or specific possible choices of the structural components
thereof, or, in the alternative, it at least would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to nevertheless so combine the above features for the
purpose and combinations as proposed by said reference and as analyzed by the Examiner
including the citations and/or Examiner comments provided above in reference to the claimed features.
Pertinently, the Examiner further notes that "Combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness", see Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. v. Cordis Corp., 554 F.3d 982, 991 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Additionally with respect to the sizing and shape of sheet: legal precedent has condoned the use of particular examples of what may be considered common sense or ordinary routine practice including changes in shape, see MPEP § 2141(I) & 2144.04(IV)(B), and In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966); and it has been held that a mere change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, see MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(A), In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCP A 1955), In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976), and Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). In the present case it is the Examiner’s position that either Hirao reasonably teaches a planar (sheet) shape structure for the embodiment of fig. 16, or, nevertheless or in the alternative It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to shape/size Hirao’s structure to be a planar sheet—as suggested by Hirao in the aforementioned other figures and accompanying text—thereby providing the expected advantages of reduced material cost and/or ease through which pressure can be exerted to force the elastomer to contact the object of inspection through the apertures of the planar sheet. Additionally, with respect to the material, 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, see MPEP § 2144.07 and In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). In the present case it is the Examiner’s position that only ordinary skill in the art is required to choose an elastic material for Hirao’s first couplant (4) and a polymeric material for Hirao’s second couplant (12)—as suggested by Hirao in the aforementioned other figures and accompanying text—thereby providing the expected advantages of promoting ultrasonic waves to transmit through the (first) couplant in a loaded state, while allowing for low frictional forces on the outer structure (12) of the couplant (4 & 12) to adjust the inspection position in a non-loaded state.
Hirao does not teach a holder for the sonic inspection device which is a holder that holds a couplant including the elastomer and the sheet member containing the polymer and having the plurality of openings, to attach the couplant to the sonic probe, the holder comprising: an opening part where to insert the sonic probe; and a part to house or hold the couplant with the sheet member at least partly being located at an outermost surface under no load condition or under loaded condition, wherein the sheet member is partly fixed to the holder.
Danicich teaches a sonic inspection device (figs. 1-2, sensor 10) (shown in figs. 1-8; Title; Abstract; col 1., ll. 5-9 “by emitting and detecting ultrasonic pulses”) comprising: a sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) including a transducer (figs. 2-3, transducer 40) configured to execute at least one of transmission and reception of a sound wave, the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) having a sonic function surface (ultrasonic functional surface of transducer 40) constituting at least one of a transmitting surface of the sound wave and a receiving surface of the sound wave (col. 2 line 66 through col. 3 line 13 “a transducer 40 having a pulse source (not shown) that generates elastic wave pulses (such as ultrasonic pulses) and an echo detector (not shown) that detects elastic wave pulses (such as ultrasonic pulses). As used herein, the term "transducer" refers to a device that is capable of transmitting and/or receiving elastic or ultrasound pulses. The transducer typically uses a piezoelectric element to send out wave pulses and to detect wave pulses. Transducers are typically either "single type" and "array type" transducers. A "single type" transducer has a single ultrasound transducer while an "array type" transducer has a plurality of ultrasound transducers arranged either in a line or in a matrix array. Both single and array type transducers, as well as other types of transducers, can be used in the present invention"); a couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) that includes an elastomer (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) (col. 3, ll. 13-31 “couplant 42 may be made from a wide variety of materials including, but not limited to, elastomers, rubber, or compliant, encapsulated epoxy materials. The dry couplant 42 is preferably made of a rubber-like material sold under the name AQUALENE.TM. sold by Materials Research Institute of Ontario, Canada, or RO-CEE RUBBER.TM. sold by NDT International of West Chester, Pa.”) and a couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) containing a polymer (col. 3, ll. 31-43 “transition portion 26 is preferably made of a polymer, such as nylon, acrylic, or polycarbonate, although other materials such as metals, ceramics, or others may be used without departing from the scope of the invention"), the elastomer (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) having a first surface (first surface of couplant 42) that comes into contact with the sonic function surface (ultrasonic functional surface of transducer 40) of the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) and a second surface (second surface of couplant 42) opposite the first surface (first surface of couplant 42), and the couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) being stacked with the elastomer (figs. 2-3, couplant 42) while in contact with the second surface (second surface of couplant 42); a loading mechanism (figs. 2-3, mechanism comprising transducer spring 56) that applies a load to the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40); and a holder (figs. 2-3, base 20 with guide 60) for the sonic inspection device (figs. 1-2, sensor 10) which is a holder (figs. 2-3, base 20 with guide 60) that holds the couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) to attach the couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) to the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) to attach the couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) to a sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40), the holder (figs. 2-3, base 20 with guide 60) comprising an opening part (figs. 2-3, central aperture 62) where to insert the sonic probe (figs. 2-3, probe having transducer 40) (col. 10, ll. 52-64 “sensor 10 of the present invention is easily uncoupled from the vessel 14 should any component of the sensor (such as the transducer 40) require replacement or servicing” and “the components of the sensor 10 may be serviced or replaced”), and a part (portion of base 20 with guide 60 to house/hold) to house or hold the couplant (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26 with couplant 42) and to which the couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) is partly fixed while the couplant member (figs. 2-3, transition portion 26) is at least partly located at an outermost surface under no load condition or under loaded condition.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Danicich’s holder for an ultrasonic probe with Hirao’s ultrasonic probe thereby providing the expected advantages of structurally supporting the ultrasonic probe including the coupling portion thereof in a convenient manner that can be easily mounted, and yet still be disassembled for purposes of repair and/or replacement of parts. Complimentarily, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hirao’s ultrasonic probe design comprising an intermediate member & an outer friction reducing coupling apertured sheet & an actuatable thrusting bias with Danicich’s device thereby providing the advantage of friction reduction (via Hirao’s apertured sheet) while adjusting sensor location while still maintaining both proper coupling (via Hirao’s intermediate member) of the ultrasonic waves into the object and with sufficient waveguide intermediate the transducer and the object for proper transceiving and controllable biasing (via Hirao’s actuator). The Examiner additionally notes that the Courts have ruled an obviousness analysis based on the collective teachings of the references does not depend on the order in which the references are listed in the statement of the rejection. See In re Bush, 296 F.2d 491, 496 (CCPA 1961): “In a case of this type where a rejection is predicated on two references each containing pertinent disclosure which has been pointed out to the applicant, we deem it to be of no significance, but merely a matter of exposition, that the rejection is stated to be on A in view of B instead of on B in view of A, or to term one reference primary and the other secondary.”
Therefore, the combination of prior art reasonably suggests a holder (Danicich: base 20 with guide 60) for a sonic inspection device that holds the couplant (Hirao: couplant 4 with structure 12) including an elastomer (Hirao: couplant 4) and a sheet member (Hirao: fig. 16, structure 12) containing a polymer and having a plurality of openings (Hirao: mesh apertures of structure 12), to attach the couplant (Hirao: couplant 4 with structure 12) to a sonic probe (Hirao: probe comprising transducer 2), the holder (Danicich: base 20 with guide 60) comprising: an opening part (Danicich: figs. 2-3, central aperture 62) where to insert the sonic probe (Danicich probe having transducer 40 | Hirao probe having transducer 2); and a part (Danicich: portion of base 20 with guide 60 to house/hold) to house hold the couplant (Hirao: transition portion 26 with couplant 42) with the sheet member (Hirao: fig. 16, structure 12) at least partly being located at an outermost surface under no load condition or under loaded condition, wherein the sheet member (Hirao: fig. 16, structure 12) is partly fixed to the holder (Danicich: base 20 with guide 60).
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1,
Hirao as modified by Danicich suggests (see analysis and combination put forth in independent claim) wherein the holder (Danicich: figs. 2-3, base 20 with guide 60) has an opening part (Danicich: figs. 2-3, central aperture 62) where to insert the sonic probe (Danicich probe having transducer 40 | Hirao probe having transducer 2) (Danicich: col. 10, ll. 52-64 “sensor 10 of the present invention is easily uncoupled from the vessel 14 should any component of the sensor (such as the transducer 40) require replacement or servicing” and “the components of the sensor 10 may be serviced or replaced”) and a part (Danicich: portion of base 20 with guide 60 to house/hold) to house or hold the couplant (Hirao: transition portion 26 with couplant 42), the sonic function surface (ultrasonic functional surface of transducer) of the sonic probe (Danicich probe having transducer 40 | Hirao probe having transducer 2) is in close contact with the elastomer (Hirao: couplant 4) to allow the transmission and reception of the sound wave between the sonic probe sonic probe (Danicich probe having transducer 40 | Hirao probe having transducer 2) in the opening part (Danicich: figs. 2-3, central aperture 62) and a test object (Danicich vessel 14| Hirao inspection object X), and the sonic probe sonic probe (Danicich probe having transducer 40 | Hirao probe having transducer 2) is movable in the opening part (Danicich: figs. 2-3, central aperture 62).
Regarding claim 3 and claim 12, where claim 3 depends on claim 1 and where claim 12 depends on claim 11,
Hirao as modified by Danicich suggests (see analysis and combination put forth in preceding claim dependencies) wherein the holder (Danicich: figs. 2-3, base 20 with guide 60) includes:
a pressing member (Danicich: figs. 2-3, pressing portion comprising guide 60) having a first opening part (Danicich: figs. 2-3, opening within guide 60) where to insert the sonic probe (Danicich probe having transducer 40 | Hirao probe having transducer 2) movably; and
a base member (Danicich: figs. 2-3, base portion comprising base 20) having a second opening part (Danicich: figs. 2-3, opening within base 20) where to house the elastomer (Hirao: couplant 4), the second opening part (Danicich: figs. 2-3, opening within base 20) communicating with the first opening part (Danicich: figs. 2-3, opening within guide 60).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 4 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim(s) 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
When this application is finally acted upon and allowed (i.e., the Notice of Allowance), the Examiner will determine, at the same time, whether the reasons why the application is being allowed are sufficiently evident from the record; see MPEP § 1302.14(I). The Examiner notes for now that neither reference suggests bonding and fixing the sheet member portion of the couplant to a lower end of a base member in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims, and in fact, the combination appears to suggest away therefrom noting that there is no need to so bond to a holder/base in Hirao and that in Danicich such bonding would appear to be against the taught utility of modularity and replaceability of components.
The Examiner notes that none of the prior art of record appears to read on the aforementioned claimed invention of claim 13 as best understood by the Examiner and the subject matter of the claims appears to be allowable if the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, can be overcome. However, upon Applicant’s amendment to overcome the rejections and objections raised by the Examiner and upon the Examiner’s better understanding of the invention a comparison of the prior art to the claims will again be made. In overcoming the above rejections, should Applicant choose to delete features which are presently in the claims, this indication of conditionally allowable subject matter for claim 13 may no longer apply. Deleting features which are presently in the claims broadens the scope of the claims and thus may render the indication of allowable subject matter no longer applicable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Applicant is invited to review PTO form 892 accompanying this Office Action listing Prior Art relevant to the instant invention cited by the Examiner.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to DAVID L SINGER whose telephone number is 303-297-4317. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 6:00pm CT, EXCEPT alternating Friday.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, John Breene can be reached on 571-272-4107. 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.
/DAVID L SINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 27DEC2025