DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Remarks
2. Claims 21-40 have been examined and rejected. This is the first Office action on the merits.
Specification
3. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: [Paragraph 6] of Applicant’s specification recites “In other cases an overtemperature condition can cause shut down the engine.” Grammatical correction is needed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 21-37 and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baratta (U.S. Patent No. 10,953,509) in view of Laurberg (U.S. Patent No. 9,683,550).
5-1. Regarding claim 21, Baratta teaches the claim comprising: sensing temperature of a component of the power trowel, by disclosing a surface preparation machine, such as a motorized trowel, that includes a motor 322 for driving a tool 324 through a drive 326 [column 7, line 66 to column 8, line 9], and microchip packages 334 [column 8, lines 29-37] and 336 [column 8, lines 38-42] that include integrated sensors of selected types, for example those that sense temperature [column 15, lines 1-6].
Although Baratta discloses that the microchip package has functionality to control and adjust tool speed, collect and/or analyze data, for example from the tool, from a user, or other external source [Baratta, column 8, lines 57-65] based on data received and any pre-existing data, such as thresholds, limits, and the like [Baratta, column 30, line 50 to column 31, line 7], Baratta does not expressly teach comparing, by a programmable logic controller, the sensed temperature to a predetermined threshold; and adjusting, by the programmable logic controller in response to the sensed temperature exceeding the predetermined threshold, a maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control. Laurberg discloses using temperature sensors disposed at locations of a turbine to generate temperature signals that are transmitted to a central control unit 9 [column 4, line 60 to column 5, line 3]. Based on the transmitted temperature signals, the central control unit 9 identifies the temperature of respective components of the turbine [column 5, lines 17-23]. The central control unit 9 calculates temperature information T in a material property information M for each of the components [column 5, line 54 to column 6, line 2] and adjusts or controls at least one operational parameter O of the turbine in consideration of the at least one material property information M [column 6, lines 3-6]. The operational parameter O may be the maximum allowable rotational speed of a rotor hub 6 and/or the power output of a generator 4 and/or the rotational speed of respective rotatable components of a gear box 5 for instance [column 6, lines 6-10]. This makes it possible to adjust the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub 6 in relation to a given constant rotational speed reference value if the temperature information T indicates that the temperature of at least one component, such as the gear box 5 for instance, exceeds or approaches a component specific threshold temperature [column 6, lines 11-24]. This allows for the dynamic optimization of the turbine without the occurrence of temperature induced damage, fatigue, etc. due to overheating of the respective components of the turbine leading to a decrease of the respective mechanical material properties of the components [column 6, lines 31-41]. Since Baratta discloses using the microchip packages to obtain data and provide active feedback in order to optimize operation and improve performance [Baratta, column 29, lines 56-67], it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust a maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control based on a sensed temperature exceeding a predetermined threshold, as taught by Laurberg. This would allow for the dynamic optimization of the trowel without the occurrence of temperature induced damage, fatigue, etc. due to overheating.
5-2. Regarding claim 22, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 21, wherein adjusting the maximum rotor speed comprises incrementally stepping down the maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control in more than one incremental step, by disclosing that monitoring operations provide real-time feedback to the trowel to adjust operation in real-time by adjusting one or more operating parameters [Baratta, column 29, lines 22-31]. Operating parameters include tool speed [Baratta, column 8, lines 57-65] and adjustments include adjusting the maximum allowable rotational speed [Laurberg, column 6, lines 11-24]. Such analysis and feedback can be carried out over time, for example iteratively, as one or more sensed parameters can be gradually adjusted to desired values, such as a set point, revised operating parameter, or the like [Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38].
5-3. Regarding claim 23, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 22. Although Baratta-Laurberg disclose iteratively gradually adjusting one or more sensed parameters to desired values [Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38], Baratta-Laurberg do not expressly teach wherein each incremental step down represents at most a 10 revolutions per minute reduction in rotor speed. However, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts overlap, lie inside, or are merely close to ranges disclosed by the prior art, particularly when there is no showing of unexpected results or criticality of the claimed ranges. See MPEP 2144.05. Gradually reducing a maximum rotor speed involves some incremental step-down speed. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incrementally step down the maximum rotor speed by at most 10 revolutions per minute. This would provide increased operational stability and provide better component longevity.
5-4. Regarding claim 24, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 22, further comprising continuing adjusting the maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control until rotor speed is reduced to a lowest operable speed, by disclosing iteratively gradually adjusting one or more sensed parameters to desired values, such as a set point, revised operating parameter, or the like [Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38]. Operating parameters include tool speed [Baratta, column 8, lines 57-65] and adjustments include adjusting the maximum allowable rotational speed [Laurberg, column 6, lines 11-24]. Since the maximum allowable rotational speed is gradually reduced to a set point, the final speed that is achieved in an iteration would be considered the lowest operable speed.
5-5. Regarding claim 25, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 24, further comprising maintaining the adjusted maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control at the lowest operable speed until the sensed temperature falls below a lower threshold for a predetermined amount of time, by disclosing that the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub may be decreased to a set point in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of at least one component exceeds or approaches a component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 16-22; Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38]. The maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub 6 may be increased in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of the component is below the respective component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 25-30]. Thus, the adjusted maximum rotational speed will be maintained at the set point as long as the temperature of at least one component exceeds a component specific threshold temperature.
5-6. Regarding claim 26, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 21, wherein adjusting the maximum rotor speed comprises incrementally stepping up the maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control in more than one incremental step, by disclosing that the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub may be increased in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of the component is below the respective component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 25-30]. Such an adjustment may be carried out over time, such as iteratively, as one or more sensed parameters can be gradually adjusted to desired values, such as a set point, revised operating parameter, or the like [Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38].
5-7. Regarding claim 27, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 26. Although Baratta-Laurberg disclose iteratively gradually adjusting one or more sensed parameters to desired values [Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38], Baratta-Laurberg do not expressly teach wherein each incremental step up represents at most a 10 revolutions per minute increase in rotor speed. However, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts overlap, lie inside, or are merely close to ranges disclosed by the prior art, particularly when there is no showing of unexpected results or criticality of the claimed ranges. See MPEP 2144.05. Gradually increasing a maximum rotor speed involves some incremental step-up speed. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incrementally step up the maximum rotor speed by at most 10 revolutions per minute. This would provide increased operational stability and provide better component longevity.
5-8. Regarding claim 28, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 26, further comprising continuing adjusting the maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control until the rotor speed reaches a highest safe operable level, by disclosing that the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub may be increased in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of the component is below the respective component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 25-30]. Such an adjustment may be carried out over time, such as iteratively, as one or more sensed parameters can be gradually adjusted to desired values, such as a set point, revised operating parameter, or the like [Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38]. This allows power output to be optimized without the occurrence of temperature induced damage, fatigue, etc. due to overheating of the respective components [Laurberg, column 6, lines 31-36].
5-9. Regarding claim 29, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 28, further comprising maintaining the adjusted maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control at the highest safe operable level until the sensed temperature exceeds the predetermined threshold, by disclosing that the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub may be increased in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of the component is below the respective component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 25-30]. The maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub may be decreased to a set point in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of at least one component exceeds or approaches a component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 16-22; Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38]. This allows power output to be optimized without the occurrence of temperature induced damage, fatigue, etc. due to overheating of the respective components [Laurberg, column 6, lines 31-36].
5-10. Regarding claim 30, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 21, wherein the predetermined threshold is a preset temperature threshold of the sensed temperature of the component, by disclosing adjusting the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub 6 in relation to a given constant rotational speed reference value if the temperature information T indicates that the temperature of at least one component, such as the gear box 5 for instance, exceeds or approaches a component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 11-24].
5-11. Regarding claim 31, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 30, further comprising sensing a temperature of a plurality of components of the power trowel, wherein each of the plurality of components has a unique predetermined temperature threshold, by disclosing using temperature sensors disposed at locations of a turbine to generate temperature signals that are transmitted to a central control unit 9 [Laurberg, column 4, line 60 to column 5, line 3]. Based on the transmitted temperature signals, the central control unit 9 identifies the temperature of respective components of the turbine [Laurberg, column 5, lines 17-23]. The central control unit 9 calculates temperature information T in a material property information M for each of the components [Laurberg, column 5, line 54 to column 6, line 2] and adjusts or controls at least one operational parameter O of the turbine in consideration of the at least one material property information M [Laurberg, column 6, lines 3-6]. The operational parameter O may be the maximum allowable rotational speed of a rotor hub 6 and/or the power output of a generator 4 and/or the rotational speed of respective rotatable components of a gear box 5 for instance [Laurberg, column 6, lines 6-10]. This makes it possible to adjust the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub 6 in relation to a given constant rotational speed reference value if the temperature information T indicates that the temperature of at least one component, such as the gear box 5 for instance, exceeds or approaches a component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 11-24].
5-12. Regarding claim 32, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 31, wherein the comparing step comprises comparing the sensed temperature of one of the plurality of components to the unique predetermined temperature threshold corresponding to the one component, by disclosing adjusting the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub 6 in relation to a given constant rotational speed reference value if the temperature information T indicates that the temperature of at least one component, such as the gear box 5 for instance, exceeds or approaches a component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 11-24].
5-13. Regarding claim 33, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 32, wherein the adjusting step comprises adjusting the maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control in response to any of the sensed temperatures exceeding the unique predetermined threshold of the component, by disclosing adjusting the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub 6 in relation to a given constant rotational speed reference value if the temperature information T indicates that the temperature of at least one component, such as the gear box 5 for instance, exceeds or approaches a component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 11-24].
5-14. Regarding claim 34, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 33, further comprising maintaining the maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control at an adjusted level until each of the sensed temperature fall below the unique predetermined threshold corresponding to each component, by disclosing that the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub may be decreased to a set point in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of at least one component exceeds or approaches a component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 16-22; Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38]. The maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub 6 may be increased in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of the component is below the respective component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 25-30]. Thus, the adjusted maximum rotational speed will be maintained at the set point as long as the temperature of at least one component exceeds a component specific threshold temperature.
5-15. Regarding claim 35, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 21, further comprising comparing the sensed temperature to a high temperature threshold representing a maximum safe operating temperature for the component sensed, and adjusting the maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control rapidly in response to the sensed temperature exceeding the high temperature threshold, by disclosing that the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub may be decreased to a set point in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of at least one component exceeds or approaches a component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 16-22; Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38]. This allows power output to be optimized without the occurrence of temperature induced damage, fatigue, etc. due to overheating of the respective components [Laurberg, column 6, lines 31-36].
5-16. Regarding claim 36, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 35, wherein rapidly adjusting the maximum rotor speed comprises incrementally stepping down the maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control in more than one large incremental step, wherein the large incremental step comprises one or more incremental steps, by disclosing gradually adjusting one or more sensed parameters to desired values, such as a set point, using multiple iterations of analysis and feedback of data from sensors [Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38]. Since the claim does not specify the amount of an incremental step, nor the time frame with which the large incremental step is achieved, gradually adjusting a maximum rotor speed to a set point may be considered as comprising more than one large incremental step by interpreting the one or more incremental steps that make up the large incremental step as the amount the rotor decreases in speed within a subset of the total time needed for the rotor to reach the set point.
5-17. Regarding claim 37, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 36. Although Baratta-Laurberg disclose gradually adjusting one or more sensed parameters to desired values, such as a set point, using multiple iterations of analysis and feedback of data from sensors [Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38], Baratta-Laurberg do not expressly teach wherein each large incremental step comprises at least a 20 revolutions per minute reduction to rotor speed. However, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts overlap, lie inside, or are merely close to ranges disclosed by the prior art, particularly when there is no showing of unexpected results or criticality of the claimed ranges. See MPEP 2144.05. Gradually reducing a maximum rotor speed involves some incremental step-down speed. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incrementally step down the maximum rotor speed by at least 20 revolutions per minute. This would allow the maximum rotor speed to reach the set point faster, allowing the components of the trowel to cool faster and prevent overheating.
5-18. Regarding claim 39, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 36, further comprising continuing rapid adjustment to the maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control until rotor speed has reached a lowest operable speed, by disclosing iteratively gradually adjusting one or more sensed parameters to desired values, such as a set point, revised operating parameter, or the like [Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38]. Operating parameters include tool speed [Baratta, column 8, lines 57-65] and adjustments include adjusting the maximum allowable rotational speed [Laurberg, column 6, lines 11-24]. Since the maximum allowable rotational speed is gradually reduced to a set point, the final speed that is achieved would be considered the lowest operable speed.
5-19. Regarding claim 40, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 39, further comprising maintaining the adjusted maximum rotor speed achievable by manual control at the lowest operable speed until the sensed temperature falls below a low predetermined threshold for a predetermined amount of time, by disclosing that the maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub may be decreased to a set point in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of at least one component exceeds or approaches a component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 16-22; Baratta, column 29, lines 31-38]. The maximum allowable rotational speed of the rotor hub 6 may be increased in relation to the rotational speed reference value if the at least one temperature information T indicates that the temperature of the component is below the respective component specific threshold temperature [Laurberg, column 6, lines 25-30]. Thus, the adjusted maximum rotational speed will be maintained at the set point as long as the temperature of at least one component exceeds a component specific threshold temperature.
6. Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baratta (U.S. Patent No. 10,953,509), in view of Laurberg (U.S. Patent No. 9,683,550), and further in view of Roberts et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,072,434).
6-1. Regarding claim 38, Baratta-Laurberg teach all the limitations of claim 36. Baratta-Laurberg do not expressly teach wherein each of the large incremental steps is transmitted at a fixed rate interval. Wang discloses that it was well known that transitioning from one reference rotor speed to another typically call for the reference rotor speed to be changed at a substantially steady rate from the initial speed to the final speed [column 1, line 66 to column 2, line 3]. This would avoid rapid changes that cause abrupt transient torque loads that in turn cause stress and wear that drive up maintenance and operational costs [column 2, lines 3-7]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the maximum rotor speed of Baratta-Laurberg at a fixed rate interval, as taught by Wang. This would avoid rapid changes that cause abrupt transient torque loads that in turn cause stress and wear that drive up maintenance and operational costs [column 2, lines 3-7].
Examiner Suggestion
7. For purposes of advancing prosecution, Examiner suggests amending independent claim 21 to incorporate a form of limitations from dependent claims 27 and 37 where the speed of each incremental step when stepping up is different from the speed of each incremental step when stepping down.
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVIN H TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8595. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6PM.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/ALVIN H TAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights