DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application and claims filed on September 25, 2020. Claims 1-12 are pending, with claims 1 and 10 in independent claim form.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. GB2218759.5 filed on 12/13/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement (specification recited GB2496137B). 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “the ridge” as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
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
The amendment filed 12/12/2023 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: Para [0036] lines 8-10, the recitation of “In Figure 6 the two bending heads are balanced so that strip tensions transmitted to the liner pipe 11 are balanced such that the liner pipe remains straight in its passage through the machine as shown in Figure 7 “.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 lines 3,6, 9 and 10, recited the limitation of “helical form“ is suggested to be replaced with “helical shape“, same goes for claims 10 and 12.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-9 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 1 recited in line 2, the limitations "at least two balanced bending heads”, is indefinite, it is unclear what constitute the balanced bending heads, are they balanced in term of weight or rotation? clarity is needed.
Claim 1 recited in line 3, the limitations "a first bending head” and in line 9 "a second bending head”, is indefinite, it is unclear if the first and second bending heads are two bending heads of the at least two balanced bending heads recited in lines 2 or new limitations. For purpose of examination Examiner will interpret the first and second bending heads as parts of the at least two balanced bending heads.
Claim 1 recited in lines 7-8, the limitations "the at least one bending head”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 in lines 1-3, recited the limitations “the ridges are formed by at least two roll forming stations and the bending heads are arranged to receive the helical strip of material after it is formed by the rolling form stations” is indefinite, this limitation is unclear since claim 1 recited that “a first bending head being arranged to deform a strip of material into a helical form to form a first helical strip”, it was understood that the strip become helical after the operation of the bending heads not the rolling form stations. Clarity is needed.
Claim 9 recited in line 2, the limitations "the bending head”, is indefinite, it is unclear which of the bending heads Applicant is referring to “is it the first or the second or the at least two bending heads”, clarity is needed.
Claim 9 recited in lines 3-4, the limitations "a ratio of a maximum strain of the non-ridge portion to the at least one ridge of the helical strip material within the bending head is approximately 1:8, greater than or equal to approximately 1:2, less than or equal to approximately 1:20, or between approximately 1:2 and approximately 1:20.” is indefinite, the metes and bounds of the claim is not defined since the claim recited broad and narrow limitations at the same time.
Claim 10 recited in lines 12-13, the limitations "there is substantially no plastic deformation of the non-ridge sections by the bending head”, is indefinite, it is unclear that the non-ridge is part of the strip and the strip under stress, bent to form a helical shape and the non-ridge sections do not sustain any bending/plastic deformation. Clarity is needed.
Claim 10 recited in lines 12-13, the limitations "the bending head”, is indefinite, it is unclear which of the bending heads Applicant is referring to “is it the first or the second bending head”, clarity is needed. Same issues with claims 11 and 12.
Claims not specifically recited are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim. Appropriate clarification is required.
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.
Claims 1-7,9-10 and 12, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Murphy GB Patent (0,110,576) hereinafter Murphy.
Regarding claim 1,
Murphy discloses a bending apparatus (see fig.1-2) for forming a helical strip of material,
wherein the bending apparatus (see fig.1-2) comprises
at least two balanced bending heads (18 see fig.2, the bending heads are considered to be balanced, see pag. 3 lines 53-57);
a first bending head (18 see fig.2, element 18 on top of element 12) being arranged to deform a strip of material (A) into a helical form to form a first helical strip of material by applying a stress to at least one ridge running longitudinally along the strip of material to provide a controlled plastic deformation of the ridge (those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8 and well known in the mechanical art that to bend a material, a bending stress is applied to that material to allow the bending deformation),
wherein the helical form of the first helical strip of material is a permanent distortion due to the deformation of the at least one ridge applied by the at least one bending head (18, those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8); and
a second bending head (18 see fig.2, element 18 on bottom of element 12) being arranged to deform a second strip of material (A) into a helical form to form a second helical strip of material by applying a stress to at least one ridge running longitudinally along the second strip of material to provide controlled plastic deformation of the at least one ridge (those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8),
wherein the first helical strip of material comprises a first asymmetric interlock feature formed by the at least one ridge running longitudinally along the first helical strip of material and the second helical strip of material comprises a second asymmetric interlock feature arranged to engage with the first interlock feature when the second helical strip of material is wrapped around the first helical strip of material (those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8), and
wherein a non-ridge portion of each helical strip of material is deformed into a cylindrical shape by elastic deformation (those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8).
Regarding claim 2,
Murphy further discloses wherein the ridges are formed by at least two roll forming stations (15,16) and the bending heads (18) are arranged to receive the helical strip of material after it is formed by the rolling form stations (15,16).
Regarding claim 3,
Murphy further discloses wherein the at least one ridge running longitudinally along the strip of material is adjacent to the non-ridge portion of the strip of material (those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8).
Regarding claim 4,
Murphy further discloses wherein the non-ridge portion forms a cylindrical shape with a central axis coaxial with the central axis of helical strip of material (those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8).
Regarding claim 5,
Murphy further discloses wherein the at least one ridge is circumferential about the cylindrical shape (those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8).
Regarding claim 6,
Murphy further discloses wherein the at least one ridge of the first strip of material and the at least one ridge of the second strip of material are physically engaged by the bending apparatus (those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8).
Regarding claim 7,
Murphy further discloses wherein the helical strips of material are formed around a liner pipe (12 or G, those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8).
Regarding claim 9,
Murphy further discloses wherein a ratio of a maximum strain of the non-ridge portion to the at least one ridge of the helical strip material within the bending head (18) is approximately 1:8, greater than or equal to approximately 1:2, less than or equal to approximately 1:20, or between approximately 1:2 and approximately 1:20 (those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performing as claimed, see fig 2-8).
Regarding claim 10,
Murphy discloses a method for forming a helical strip of material (see fig.7-8), the method comprising:
at a first bending head (18 see fig.2, element 18 on top of element 12) of a bending apparatus (see fig.1-2),
receiving a first length of strip material (A), wherein the first length of strip material comprises
at least one ridge along its length and a non-ridge section adjacent to the at least one ridge along its length (see fig.6);
PNG
media_image1.png
234
312
media_image1.png
Greyscale
at the first bending head (18), plastically deforming the first length of strip material (A) into a helical form (see fig.2 and 7 and 8) by applying a stress to the at least one ridge along the length of the ridge (see fig.2, shown element (A) being bent, and well known in the mechanical art that to bend a material, a bending stress is applied to that material to allow the bending/plastic deformation and since the material is being stretched under bending head to bend, the operation is interpreted as plastic deformation of the strip and ridge);
at a second bending head (18 see fig.2, element 18 on bottom of element 12) of the bending apparatus (see fig.1-2),
receiving a second length of strip material (A, fig.2 shown element A on two side of the apparatus), wherein the second length of strip material comprises at least one ridge along its length and a non-ridge section adjacent to the at least one ridge along its length (see fig.6);
at the second bending head (18), plastically deforming the second length of strip material (A) into a helical form (see fig.2 and 7 and 8) by applying a stress to the at least one ridge along the length of the ridge (see fig.2);
wherein there is substantially no plastic deformation of the non-ridge sections (see element A of fig.7-8) by the bending head (18); and
wherein the first and second strips of material (A) have a common central axis (G) when formed into a helical form (see fig.2).
Regarding claim 12,
Murphy further discloses at the bending head (18), receiving a liner pipe (12 or G), wherein the helical form of strip material surrounds the liner pipe (see fig.2).
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.
Claims 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy GB Patent (0,110,576) hereinafter Murphy in view of Bateman et al. US Patent (9,187,288).
Regarding claim 8,
The prior art Murphy discloses all limitations in claim 1.
Murphy discloses wherein each bending head (18) arranged to apply a stress to inner and outer surfaces (element 18 and 12 applied the stress) of each ridge in order to deform the respective strip of material by plastically deforming the at least one ridge of the strip of material (those recitations are intended use languages and the reference is capable of performed as claimed see fig 2-8) but does not disclose the bending head to be roller set comprising male and female roller shapes.
Murphy and Bateman disclose both art in the same field of endeavor of the claimed invention (i.e. metal bending).
Bateman, in a similar art, teaches a bending head (90) to be roller set comprising male (94,94’) and female (93,98,104) roller shapes.
Bateman teaches the bending head to be roller set to be able to keep the material (i.e. strip) to travel in a straight line without laterally bending (Col.8 lines 5-6), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to construct the bending heads of Murphy to be roller set comprising male and female roller shapes as taught by Bateman as it would be beneficiary to Murphy to be able to keep the material (i.e. strip) to travel in a straight line without laterally bending and render operation more efficient.
Regarding claim 11,
The prior art Murphy discloses all limitations in claim 10.
Murphy discloses wherein each bending head (18) apply a stress to inner and outer surfaces (element 18 and 12 applied the stress) of each ridge in order to deform the respective strip of material by plastically deforming the at least one ridge of the strip of material (see fig.2, shown element (A) being bent, and well known in the mechanical art that to bend a material, a bending stress is applied to that material to allow the bending/plastic deformation and since the material is being stretched under bending head to bend, the operation is interpreted as plastic deformation of the strip and ridge) but does not disclose the bending head to be roller set comprising male and female roller shapes.
Murphy and Bateman disclose both art in the same field of endeavor of the claimed invention (i.e. metal bending).
Bateman, in a similar art, teaches a bending head (90) to be roller set comprising male (94,94’) and female (93,98,104) roller shapes.
Bateman teaches the bending head to be roller set to be able to keep the material (i.e. strip) to travel in a straight line without laterally bending (Col.8 lines 5-6), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to construct the bending heads of Murphy to be roller set comprising male and female roller shapes as taught by Bateman as it would be beneficiary to Murphy to be able to keep the material (i.e. strip) to travel in a straight line without laterally bending and render operation more efficient.
Conclusion
Prior Art GB2433453 is also relevant as it shows the bending apparatus with bending heads to deform strip of material (with ridges) to helical shape. The bending head are roller set with male and female roller shapes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Smith O. BAPTHELUS whose telephone number is (571)272-5976. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00-6:00.
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, Christopher L. Templeton can be reached at (571)270 1477. 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.
November 10, 2025
/BSO/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725