FIRST NON-FINAL REJECTION
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
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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, 3, 5-7, 9-12, 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guo et al. CN112730075 (refer to the translation for page citations).
With respect to claims 1, 14, and 18, Guo teaches a system for testing pressure testing device, figure 1) comprising: a testpiece (test pieces 11, page 6, figure 4) that comprises: a body that extends along an axis (the body of the test piece 11, figure 5); and a hollow interior that is formed by the body (the test piece is hollow, figure 4); a test bed that internally pressurizes the hollow interior of the testpiece (mounting base 12 having a pressurizing interface 121 that communicates to a test piece interface 124 for each of the test pieces 11, page 6, figures 5-6); and a data collector that acquires data representing a property of the testpiece (the pressure module 2 and measurement and control module 3 that record a pressure change curve of the test piece, pages 6 and 8-9, figure 1).
With respect to claim 3, Guo teaches wherein the data collector comprises: a sensor that collects the data (pressure sensor 31); and a computer (the control module 3 that comprises computers, page 6) that determines at least one property of the testpiece based on the data collected by the sensor (interpreted as the recorded pressure change curve, pages 6 and 8-9).
With respect to claim 5, Guo teaches wherein the test bed comprises: a base plate that supports the testpiece (mounting base 12 supports each of the test pieces 11, figure 6); and a conduit (connecting joint 131) that extends through the base plate and that is in fluid communication with the hollow interior of the testpiece (the connecting joint 131 is connected with the test piece transfer joint 134 and the test piece transfer joint 134 is connected with the test piece 11, page 7, figure 5).
With respect to claims 6-7, Guo teaches a heater that heats the testpiece and an enclosure that encloses the testpiece wherein at least one of an enclosure-pressure within the enclosure is controllable and an enclosure-temperature within the enclosure is controllable (the test pieces 11 may be placed in a temperature box for a temperature load, page 9).
With respect to claims 9-10, Guo teaches wherein: the body of the testpiece comprises: a first portion that extends along the axis (interpreted as test piece switching joint 134); and a second portion that extends from the first portion along the axis (interpreted as the portion of the test piece 11 that extends from the test piece switching joint 134, figure 5); the first portion comprises a first cross-sectional dimension and thickness (the test piece switching joint 134 has a first cross sectional dimension as well as a first thickness, figure 5); the second portion comprises a second cross-sectional dimension and thickness (the portion of the test piece 11 that extends from the test piece switching joint 134 has second cross sectional dimension as well as a second thickness, figure 5); and the first cross-sectional dimension and thickness and the second cross-sectional dimension and thickness are different (the cross sections and thicknesses are different, figure 5).
With respect to claims 11, 15, and 17, Guo teaches wherein: the body of the testpiece comprises: a first portion that extends along the axis (interpreted as test piece switching joint 134); and a second portion that extends from the first portion along the axis (interpreted as the portion of the test piece 11 that extends from the test piece switching joint 134, figure 5); the first portion comprises at least one of a first material (the test piece switching joint 134 being made of metal, page 7), a first cross-sectional dimension and a first thickness (the test piece switching joint 134 has a first cross sectional dimension as well as a first thickness, figure 5); the second portion comprises at least one of a second material (the test piece 11 being made of a metal, page 7); a second cross-sectional dimension and a second thickness (the portion of the test piece 11 that extends from the test piece switching joint 134 has second cross sectional dimension as well as a second thickness, figure 5); and at least one of the first material and the second material, the first cross-sectional dimension and the second cross-sectional dimension, and the first thickness and the second thickness are different (the cross sections and thicknesses are different, figure 5).
With respect to claims 12, 16, and 19, Guo teaches a plurality of testpieces having a body and having hollow interiors (figure 6), wherein: each one of the testpieces comprises the body and the hollow interior (figure 5); the test bed internally pressurizes the hollow interior of each one of the testpieces (mounting base 12 having a pressurizing interface 121 that communicates to a test piece interface 124 for each of the test pieces 11, page 6, figures 5-6); and the data collector acquires the data that represents each one of the testpieces (the pressure module 2 and measurement and control module 3 that record a pressure change curve of the test piece, pages 6 and 8-9, figure 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. CN112730075 (refer to the translation for page citations) in view of Griffis et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0080667.
With respect to claim 2, Guo teaches the claimed invention except wherein the body, comprising the hollow interior, is formed by additive manufacturing.
Griffis teaches manufacturing method of metal components where a test article formed by additive manufacturing (paragraphs 2 and 5).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of Guo and manufacture a test piece by way of additive manufacturing as taught by Griffis in order to create a test piece without the use of any sort of tools, molds or fixtures, and with little or no waste material (paragraph 2, Griffis).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. CN112730075 (refer to the translation for page citations) in view of Robertson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0146345.
With respect to claim 4, Guo teaches the claimed invention except wherein: the sensor comprises an image sensor; and the computer determines deformation and strain of the testpiece using digital image correlation.
Robertson teaches a method of optically determining a change in magnitude of at least one dimensional characteristic of a sample in response to a selected chamber environment (abstract) wherein a dimensional measurement apparatus 110 includes a pressure vessel 10, optical perception device 80, and light emitting device 90, where the optical perception device 80 is positioned above and perpendicular to upper window 20 and light emitting device 90 is positioned below and oriented to direct light emitted toward lower window 22 and causing light emitted from light emitting device 90 to pass into and through sample 100 withing a chamber 30, and toward optical perception device 80 (paragraph 39, figure 2A). Thereby, determining a dimensional change (deformation and strain) of the sample 100 from the optical measurement (paragraph 89).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of Guo optical sensing method and dimensional change measurement as taught by Robertson in order to improve the ease with which samples may be analyzed (paragraph 86, Robertson).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 13, and 20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FREDDIE KIRKLAND III whose telephone number is (571)272-2232. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, John Breene can be reached at (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.
FREDDIE KIRKLAND III
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
/Freddie Kirkland III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 12/22/2025