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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 and 5 – 9 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.
Claim 3 recites “wherein a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) is configured to control the device and operate ...” It is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the ‘remotely operated vehicle’ to be a positively required element of the claimed ‘sealing ring positioning device,’ or whether Applicant intends the claim to require that the ‘sealing ring positioning device’ is configured for use with the ‘remotely operated vehicle’ recited. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation such that the ‘sealing ring positioning device’ is configure for use with the ‘remotely operated vehicle.’ Examiner notes that this interpretation is supported by the Specification (paragraphs 25 and 34).
Claim 5 recites the limitation “wherein one side of the plate comprises a projection of a side of a wall.” It is generally unclear as to Applicant’s intent regarding “of a side of a wall.”
Claim 6 recites “a radius of the semicircle shape of the lower portion approximately corresponds to an external diameter of the sealing ring.” The limitation is indefinite for several reasons. First, Examiner notes that “approximately” is a term of degree which is not expressly defined by the Specification. Therefore, the metes and bounds of “approximately corresponds” is unclear. Secondly, Examiner further notes that the ‘sealing ring’ is previously recited as being functional with the claimed ‘sealing ring positioning device’ (claim 1, “wherein the sealing ring positioning device is configured to install a sealing ring ...”). Therefore, it is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to positively require the ‘sealing ring,’ such that the external diameter of the sealing ring has a radius which corresponds to a radius of the semicircle shape of the sealing ring positioning device, or whether Applicant intends the limitation to require the semicircle shape of the sealing ring positioning device to have a radius which is configured to correspond with a radius of the sealing ring. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “the semicircle shape of the lower portion comprises a radius which is configured to correspond to an external diameter of the sealing ring.”
Claim 7 recites the limitation “a layer of high-performance glue is disposed on the lower portion having the semicircle shape, wherein the sealing ring is deposited on the high-performance glue a space formed by the semicircle shape.” The limitation is indefinite for several reasons. First, Examiner notes that “high-performance glue” is a term which does not have a commonly understood definition in the art and is not expressly defined in the Specification. Therefore, Applicant’s intent regarding “high-performance glue” is unclear. Secondly, Examiner further notes that the ‘sealing ring’ is previously recited as being functional with the claimed ‘sealing ring positioning device’ (claim 1, “wherein the sealing ring positioning device is configured to install a sealing ring ...”). Therefore, it is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to positively require the ‘sealing ring,’ such that the sealing ring is deposited on the semicircle shape, or whether Applicant intends the limitation to require the semicircle shape of the sealing ring positioning device to be configured to allow the sealing ring to be deposited on the semicircle shape. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “the lower portion of the semicircle shape is configured to allow a layer of glue to be deposited thereon, wherein the semicircle shape is configured to all the sealing ring to be deposited on the glue.”
Claim 7 further recites the limitation “an addition layer of high-performance glue is applied on contact regions of the sealing ring and the lower portion.” The limitation is indefinite for several reasons. First, Examiner notes that “high-performance glue” is a term which does not have a commonly understood definition in the art and is not expressly defined in the Specification. Therefore, Applicant’s intent regarding “high-performance glue” is unclear. Secondly, Examiner further notes that the ‘sealing ring’ is previously recited as being functional with the claimed ‘sealing ring positioning device’ (claim 1, “wherein the sealing ring positioning device is configured to install a sealing ring ...”). Therefore, it is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to positively require the ‘sealing ring,’ such that an additional layer of high-performance glue is applied to contact regions of the sealing ring and lower portion, or whether Applicant intends the limitation to require the lower portion of the sealing ring positioning device to be configured for use with a sealing ring having high-performance glue. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “the lower portion is configured to for use with the sealing ring having an additional layer of glue applied to contact regions of the sealing ring.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “wherein the device is launched into a subsea environment in a tool basket ...” Examiner notes that the claim is directed towards “a sealing ring positioning device.” Therefore, it is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to positively require the step of ‘launching the sealing ring positioning device into a subsea environment in a tool basket ...,’ such that the claim is directed towards “a method of operating a sealing ring positioning device,’ or whether Applicant intends the limitation to recite functional language of the ‘sealing ring positioning device,’ such that the claim is directed towards the ‘sealing ring positioning device’ itself. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “wherein the sealing ring positioning device is configured to be launched into a subsea environment in a tool basket ...”
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 - 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boulet (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2020/0278068).
As to claim 1, Boulet teaches a sealing ring positioning device (abstract), comprising a lower portion having a semicircle shape (figure 1, left portion of element 10 being the ‘lower portion’ and element 12 being the ‘semicircular shape’; paragraph 17). Examiner notes that “having” is commonly defined by Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary as “to contain as part or whole.” Therefore, because Boulet teaches the lower portion containing a semicircular shape (figure 1, element 12), Boulet teaches the lower portion “having” the semicircular shape. Boulet further teaches a middle portion comprising a magnet (figures 1 and 3, middle portion of element 10 being the ‘middle portion’ and element 50 being the ‘magnet,’ see below; paragraph 24), the magnet arranged in a laterally displaced position in relation to the lower portion (figures 1 and 3, element 50 and left portion of element 10), wherein the sealing ring positioning device is configured to install a sealing ring on a flange of a pipeline. Examiner notes that this can be found because Boulet expressly teaches the sealing ring positioning device being configured to install or remove a section of pipe onto a pipeline (figure 1, element 60 being the ‘pipe’; paragraphs 1 – 2 and 17). It is the position of the Examiner that the pipe of Boulet may reasonably be considered a ‘sealing ring.’ Alternatively, Examiner notes that the device of Boulet may also be used to install a sealing ring onto a flange of a pipeline.
As to claim 2, Boulet further teaches an upper portion comprising a handle having a T shape (figure 1, right portion of element 10 being the ‘upper portion,’ see below).
PNG
media_image1.png
767
1055
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 3, Examiner notes that claim 3 is being reasonably interpreted so as to recite functional language of the claimed sealing ring positioning device. It is the position of the Examiner that the sealing ring positioning device of Boulet is configured for use with the ‘remotely operated vehicle’ recited in claim 3.
As to claim 4, Boulet further teaches a strap in an upper part of the handle (figure 1, element 67 being the ‘strap’; paragraph 17).
As to claim 5, Boulet teaches that the magnet of the middle portion is positioned in a groove that is arranged in a square plate (figures 2 – 4, element 20 being the ‘square plate’ and element 23 being the ‘groove’; paragraph 24), wherein one side of the plate comprises a projection of a side of a wall (figure 2, element 21 being the ‘projection’ and ‘side of a wall’; paragraph 22).
As to claim 6, Boulet teaches that the semicircle shape of the lower portion comprises a radius which is configured to correspond to an external diameter of the sealing ring (figure 1, element 12).
As to claim 7, Boulet teaches that the lower portion of the semicircle shape is configured to allow a layer of glue to be deposited thereon, wherein the semicircle shape is configured to all the sealing ring to be deposited on the glue (figure 1, element 12). Examiner recognizes that the lower portion further comprises cross bars which would impede the sealing ring from being deposited onto the semicircle shape. However, Examiner notes that the semicircle shape itself, rather than the overall lower portion, would allow for depositing the sealing ring onto the semicircle shape. Boulet further teaches that the lower portion is configured to for use with the sealing ring having an additional layer of glue applied to contact regions of the sealing ring (figure 1, element 12). Again, Examiner recognizes that the lower portion further comprises cross bars which would impede the sealing ring from being deposited onto the semicircle shape. However, Examiner notes that the semicircle shape itself, rather than the overall lower portion, would allow for depositing the sealing ring onto the semicircle shape. Boulet further teaches tape configured to wrap the lower portion and the sealing ring (figure 1, element 65 being the ‘tape’; paragraphs 17 and 25). Examiner notes that “tape” is commonly defined by Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary as “a narrow flexible strip or band.” Because the chain (element 65) of Boulet is a ‘narrow flexible strip or band,’ the chain may reasonably be considered a ‘tape.’
Claims 8 and 9 each recite functional language of the claimed sealing ring positioning device. It is the position of the Examiner that the sealing ring positioning device of Boulet is configured for use described in each of claims 8 and 9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER BESLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 am - 7:30 pm (EST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sunil Singh can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J. BESLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726