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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 5-6, 21 and 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 a1 as being anticipated by Mehn et al. (US 10118241).
Regarding claim 1, Mehn et al. discloses a method comprising:
supplying, via “communications wires” (20 and 28. Col.7 at lines 33-42, i.e., Indeed, the communication circuitry 70 of each of the UI modules 38, 40, 42 may be configured to communicate with control circuitry 72 that is internal to (e.g., within a housing of) the welding system component on which the UI module 38, 40, 42 is located, either wirelessly or via communication ports on the respective circuit board 64 that are configured to mate with complementary ports in the respective welding system component. Fig.1 shows torch 42 connected to the welding system 10 via at least two wiring segments. This suggests if examiner selected using communication ports, the communication wires must be used. The above passage also suggests that each of 20 and 28 must include at least one communication wire (implies at least two wires) in order to connect to the communication ports of the welding system 10), an electric signal between “a welding module” (12) and “a torch” (18);
“monitoring the electric signal, in a first state, for a first type of power trigger signal received from the torch; monitoring the electric signal, in a second state, for a second type of power trigger signal, different from the first type of power trigger signal, from the torch; and in response to detecting the first type of power trigger signal or the second type of power trigger signal, delivering welding type power to the torch” (col.5 at lines 45-52, i.e., the display screens 56 of the upper UI module 38 may be display screens for displaying operating parameters (e.g., voltage, current, wire feed speed, welding wire diameter, and so forth) as they change during operation of the welding system 10. Col.6 at lines 4-8, i.e., In addition, as described in greater detail below, the various display screens 56, 58, 60 may display information that has been synchronized between the various UI modules 38, 40, 42. Col.5 at lines 53-64, i.e., In contrast to the upper and lower UI modules 38, 40, the torch UI module 42 illustrated in FIG. 5 includes a relatively smaller display screen 60 (e.g., plasma, LCD, LED, touch, etc.). The torch UI module 42 may include control buttons 62 (e.g., soft keys, hard buttons, knobs, etc.). As will be appreciated, the functionality of these control buttons 62 may be relatively simpler than that of either the upper UI module 38 or the lower UI module 40. However, the torch UI module 42 may enable the operator to adjust system parameters quickly (e.g., without having to walk over to the welding power supply unit 12 or the welding wire feeder 14), resulting in more efficient welding processes. The above paragraphs suggest signal includes operating parameters and operating parameters is constantly monitored and displayed via display of welding device 38 and display of the welding torch 60. Examiner noted that if control button 62 of torch UI module 42 is capable of adjusting operation parameters (hence, without walk over to the welding power supply to make adjustment) then the control button 62 of welding torch is able to adjust or send different signals to the welding power supply (i.e., welding system 10) in order to adjust different welding power to the torch).
Regarding claim 5, Mehn et al. discloses “electrically powering a human-
machine interface of the torch with the electric signal” (a human-
machine interface 60 of the torch 18).
Regarding claim 6, Mehn et al. discloses “the torch comprises at least one display” (a human- machine interface 60 of the torch 18 comprises at least one display or screen).
Regarding claim 25, Mehn et al. discloses “electrically powering a human- machine interface of the torch with the electric signal” (a human-
machine interface 60 of the torch 18).
Regarding claim 26, Mehn et al. discloses “the torch comprises at least one display” (a human- machine interface 60 of the torch 18 comprises at least one display or screen).
Regarding claim 21, Mehn et al. discloses a method comprising:
supplying, via “communications wires” (20 and 28. Col.7 at lines 33-42, i.e., Indeed, the communication circuitry 70 of each of the UI modules 38, 40, 42 may be configured to communicate with control circuitry 72 that is internal to (e.g., within a housing of) the welding system component on which the UI module 38, 40, 42 is located, either wirelessly or via communication ports on the respective circuit board 64 that are configured to mate with complementary ports in the respective welding system component. Fig.1 shows torch 42 connected to the welding system 10 via at least two wiring segments. This suggests if examiner selected using communication ports, the communication wires must be used. The above passage also suggests that each of 20 and 28 must include at least one communication wire (implies at least two wires) in order to connect to the communication ports of the welding system 10), an electric signal between “a welding module” (12) and “a torch” (18);
“monitoring the electric signal for a first type of power trigger signal received from the torch; monitoring the electric signal for a second type of power trigger signal, different from the first type of power trigger signal, from the torch; and in response to detecting the first type of power trigger signal or the second type of power trigger signal, delivering welding type power to the torch” (col.5 at lines 45-52, i.e., the display screens 56 of the upper UI module 38 may be display screens for displaying operating parameters (e.g., voltage, current, wire feed speed, welding wire diameter, and so forth) as they change during operation of the welding system 10. Col.6 at lines 4-8, i.e., In addition, as described in greater detail below, the various display screens 56, 58, 60 may display information that has been synchronized between the various UI modules 38, 40, 42. Col.5 at lines 53-64, i.e., In contrast to the upper and lower UI modules 38, 40, the torch UI module 42 illustrated in FIG. 5 includes a relatively smaller display screen 60 (e.g., plasma, LCD, LED, touch, etc.). The torch UI module 42 may include control buttons 62 (e.g., soft keys, hard buttons, knobs, etc.). As will be appreciated, the functionality of these control buttons 62 may be relatively simpler than that of either the upper UI module 38 or the lower UI module 40. However, the torch UI module 42 may enable the operator to adjust system parameters quickly (e.g., without having to walk over to the welding power supply unit 12 or the welding wire feeder 14), resulting in more efficient welding processes. The above paragraphs suggest signal includes operating parameters and operating parameters is constantly monitored and displayed via display of welding device 38 and display of the welding torch 60. Examiner noted that if control button 62 of torch UI module 42 is capable of adjusting operation parameters (hence, without walk over to the welding power supply to make adjustment) then the control button 62 of welding torch is able to adjust or send different signals to the welding power supply (i.e., welding system 10) in order to adjust different welding power to the torch).
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) 2 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehn et al. (US 10118241) in view of Vogel et al. (US 20160193682).
Regarding claim 2, Mehn et al. discloses the electric signal.
Mehn et al. is silent regarding the electric signal is a DC signal.
Vogel et al. teaches “the electric signal is a DC signal” (The output 61 of circuit 54 provides a DC signal to torch 14 that can be delivered at a first level (such as 10 A) for marking and a second level (such as 100 A) for cutting). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Vogel et al., by utilizing Vogel et al.’s DC signal for Mehn et al.’s electrical signal, to allow system to combine power and data delivery simultaneously and provide highly stable for data processing.
Regarding claim 22, Mehn et al. discloses the electric signal.
Mehn et al. is silent regarding the electric signal is a DC signal.
Vogel et al. teaches “the electric signal is a DC signal” (The output 61 of circuit 54 provides a DC signal to torch 14 that can be delivered at a first level (such as 10 A) for marking and a second level (such as 100 A) for cutting). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Vogel et al., by utilizing Vogel et al.’s DC signal for Mehn et al.’s electrical signal, to allow system to combine power and data delivery simultaneously and provide highly stable for data processing.
Claim(s) 3-4 and 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehn et al. (US 10118241) in view of Blide (US 6956184).
Regarding claim 3, Mehn et al. discloses “the monitoring the electric signal, in the first state” (as explained in claim 1 above, the display screens 56 of the upper UI module 38 may be display screens for displaying operating parameters (e.g., voltage, current); the various display screens 56, 58, 60 may display information that has been synchronized between the various UI modules 38, 40, 42. he torch UI module 42 may enable the operator to adjust system parameters quickly. This suggest that electric signal is being monitored because the electrical signal can be displayed on the display screen of the torch), comprises detecting that the electric signal
Blide teaches “the electric signal has been shorted” (abstract, i.e. The trigger has an unsqueezed position with no current flow, a fully squeezed position with full current flow and a range of motion area between the unsqueezed position and the fully squeezed position with a range of current flow). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Blide, by modifying Mehn et al.’s control trigger according to Blide’s control trigger, to ensure precise and consistent bead formation and prevent crater defects.
Regarding claim 4, Mehn et al. discloses “the monitoring the electric signal, in the
second state, comprises detecting a Mehn et al., as explained in claims 1 and 3 above, the electric signal includes operating parameters which can be displayed and monitored).
Mehn et al. is silent regarding the signal is a repetitively modulated signal.
Blide teaches “the signal is a repetitively modulated signal”. (abstract, i.e. The trigger has an unsqueezed position with no current flow, a fully squeezed position with full current flow and a range of motion area between the unsqueezed position and the fully squeezed position with a range of current flow. This suggest that the user can turn it on and off during a given period of time as needed and the turn it on and off would considered as repetitively modulated signal). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Blide, by modifying Mehn et al.’s control trigger according to Blide’s control trigger, to ensure precise and consistent bead formation and prevent crater defects.
Regarding claim 23, Mehn et al. discloses “the monitoring the electric signal, in the
second state, comprises detecting a Mehn et al., as explained in claims 1 and 3 above, the electric signal includes operating parameters which can be displayed and monitored).
Mehn et al. is silent regarding the signal is a repetitively modulated signal.
Blide teaches “the signal is a repetitively modulated signal”. (abstract, i.e. The trigger has an unsqueezed position with no current flow, a fully squeezed position with full current flow and a range of motion area between the unsqueezed position and the fully squeezed position with a range of current flow. This suggest that the user can turn it on and off during a given period of time as needed and the turn it on and off would considered as repetitively modulated signal). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Blide, by modifying Mehn et al.’s control trigger according to Blide’s control trigger, to ensure precise and consistent bead formation and prevent crater defects.
Regarding claim 24, Mehn et al. discloses “the monitoring the electric signal, in the
second state, comprises detecting a Mehn et al., as explained in claims 1 and 3 above, the electric signal includes operating parameters which can be displayed and monitored).
Mehn et al. is silent regarding the signal is a repetitively modulated signal.
Blide teaches “the signal is a repetitively modulated signal”. (abstract, i.e. The trigger has an unsqueezed position with no current flow, a fully squeezed position with full current flow and a range of motion area between the unsqueezed position and the fully squeezed position with a range of current flow. This suggest that the user can turn it on and off during a given period of time as needed and the turn it on and off would considered as repetitively modulated signal). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Blide, by modifying Mehn et al.’s control trigger according to Blide’s control trigger, to ensure precise and consistent bead formation and prevent crater defects.
Claim(s) 7-8 and 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehn et al. (US 10118241) in view of Doi et al. (US 20150375330).
Regarding claim 7, Mehn et al. discloses the electric signal.
Mehn et al. is silent regarding superimposing a carrier signal on the electric signal.
Doi et al. teaches “superimposing a carrier signal on the electric signal” (the communication signal superimposed on the power transfer line). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Doi et al., by utilizing Doi et al.’s superimposing signals with power cable in Mehn et al.’s communication signal line, to prevent the control line being cut due to being caught on metal edge portions or protrusions/recession depending on the work environment of the site (para.0004) and communication can be performed as accurately as possible via the power transfer line. (para.0008) as taught by Doi et al.
Regarding claim 8, Mehn et al. discloses “at least one of transmitting data to, or receiving data from, the torch via the carrier signal” (Mehn et al. teaches at least one of transmitting data to, or receiving data from, the torch. Doi et al., teaches the carrier signal which is power transfer line signal).
Regarding claim 27, Mehn et al. discloses the electric signal.
Mehn et al. is silent regarding superimposing a carrier signal on the electric signal.
Doi et al. teaches “superimposing a carrier signal on the electric signal” (the communication signal superimposed on the power transfer line). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Doi et al., by utilizing Doi et al.’s superimposing signals with power cable in Mehn et al.’s communication signal line, to prevent the control line being cut due to being caught on metal edge portions or protrusions/recession depending on the work environment of the site (para.0004) and communication can be performed as accurately as possible via the power transfer line. (para.0008) as taught by Doi et al.
Regarding claim 28, Mehn et al. discloses “at least one of transmitting data to, or receiving data from, the torch via the carrier signal” (Mehn et al. teaches at least one of transmitting data to, or receiving data from, the torch. Doi et al., teaches the carrier signal which is power transfer line signal).
Claim(s) 9 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehn et al. (US 10118241) in view of Doi et al. (US 20150375330) as applied in claims 7-8 above, and further in view of Zhang (CN 114094933 A).
Regarding claim 9, modified Mehn et al. discloses “the carrier signal” (Doi et al., teaches the carrier signal which is power transfer line signal).
Modified Mehn et al. is silent regarding the carrier signal is modulated using at least one of on-off keying (OOK), frequency modulation (FM), amplitude modulation (AM), frequency shift keying (FSK), or amplitude shift keying (ASK) to send the data.
Zhang teaches “the carrier signal is modulated using at least one of on-off keying (OOK), frequency modulation (FM), amplitude modulation (AM), frequency shift keying (FSK), or amplitude shift keying (ASK) to send the data” (on page 10, i.e., The frequency shift keying is suitable for power line narrow band communication and orthogonal frequency division is suitable for power line broadband communication, and the spread spectrum communication is applied in power line narrow band communication and power line broadband communication. Modulation and demodulation of carrier communication of power line can adopt existing technology). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Zhang, by using Zhang’s frequency shifting keying for Mehn et al.’s power line, to provide unmatched resistance to interference, enhanced privacy and high signal robustness.
Regarding claim 29, modified Mehn et al. discloses “the carrier signal” (Doi et al., teaches the carrier signal which is power transfer line signal).
Modified Mehn et al. is silent regarding the carrier signal is modulated using at least one of on-off keying (OOK), frequency modulation (FM), amplitude modulation (AM), frequency shift keying (FSK), or amplitude shift keying (ASK) to send the data.
Zhang teaches “the carrier signal is modulated using at least one of on-off keying (OOK), frequency modulation (FM), amplitude modulation (AM), frequency shift keying (FSK), or amplitude shift keying (ASK) to send the data” (on page 10, i.e., The frequency shift keying is suitable for power line narrow band communication and orthogonal frequency division is suitable for power line broadband communication, and the spread spectrum communication is applied in power line narrow band communication and power line broadband communication. Modulation and demodulation of carrier communication of power line can adopt existing technology). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Zhang, by using Zhang’s frequency shifting keying for Mehn et al.’s power line, to provide unmatched resistance to interference, enhanced privacy and high signal robustness.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehn et al. (US 10118241) in view of Doi et al. (US 20150375330) as applied in claims 7-8 above, and further in view of Naber et al. (US 20150306691).
Regarding claim 10, modified Mehn et al. discloses “the data comprises at least one of a welding parameter” (Mehn et al., As suggested in claim 1 above, signal includes operating parameters and operating parameters is constantly monitored and displayed via display of welding device 38 and display of the welding torch 60).
Modified Mehn is silent regarding a software update.
Naber et al. teaches “a software update” ([0039], i.e., the software applications can be updated and distributed in a global fashion to ensure that each user is using the latest and greatest technology). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Naber et al., by adding Naber et al.’s software update to Mehn’s device, to fix security flaws, eliminate bugs and boost system performance.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehn et al. (US 10118241) in view of Chantry (US 2015/0158109).
Regarding claim 11, Mehn et al. discloses “in response to detecting the first type of power trigger signal or the second type of power signal, delivering as explained in claim 1 above, Mehn teaches control button 62 of torch UI module 42 is capable of adjusting operation parameters (hence, without walk over to the welding power supply to make adjustment) then the control button 62 of welding torch is able to adjust or send different signals to the welding power supply (i.e., welding system 10) in order to adjust different welding power to the torch)).
Mehn et al. silent regarding cutting type power to the torch.
Chantry teaches “cutting type power to the torch” ([0061] During operation a user can connect a cutting torch to the cutting power supply). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Mehn et al. with Chantry, by replacing Mehn et al.’s welding system with Chantry’s welding system, to provide cutting torch for cutting workpiece (para.0061) as taught by Chantry.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY CHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-7107. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/JIMMY CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights