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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-5 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of U.S. Patent No. 11,964,346 (hereinafter US ‘346) in view of Fulmer et al (US 2005/0269306).
The patented claims of US ‘346 discloses the system that provides a method including providing a current waveform to a contact tip having a first exit orifice and a second exit orifice, providing a first wire electrode which is a first consumable and a second wire electrode which is a second consumable, respectively, the current waveform having a bridge current including another current level, as a peak current, greater than the bridge current portion, the first exit orifice and the second exit orifice are positioned from each other at a distance as the first exit is separated from the second exit orifice wherein a bridge droplet between the first consumable and the second consumable is formed during the current waveform having a bridge current of the current waveform while preventing solid portions delivered through the first exit orifice and the second exit orifice, and the current flows from the contact tip to the bridge droplet through both the first and second consumables wherein the current is divided between the first consumable and the second consumable wherein the current flows form the bridge droplet to the puddule. But, the claims of US ‘346 do not explicitly disclose the current waveform having the bridge current portion below a spray transition current.
Fulmer discloses it is known to provide a current waveform having a bridge current portion including a spray transition current that forms a droplet wherein a peak current above the spray transition level transfers or detaches the droplet onto a workpiece/weld puddle (also, see para 0004).
In view of Fulmer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt the patented claims of US 346 with the current waveform having the bridge current that is below a spray transition level to predictably form a droplet on the first consumable and the second consumable which would predictably form the bridge droplet wherein the peak current portion, which is shown by the current greater than the bridge current of the current waveform, would detach or drop the bridge droplet onto the workpiece or its weld puddle to predictably perform the desired welding operations as the current waveform is known to form and transfer droplet of metal from the consumable/electrodes for welding operations in the art.
The claims of US ‘346 including claims 2-5 disclose the recited elements of the pending claims including 2-5, respectively, wherein the pending claims are deemed obvious variants of the patented claims of US ‘346 as modified by Fulmer.
Claims 1, 2, 4 and 5 are, also, rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 10-18 of U.S. Patent No. 10,792,752 (hereinafter US ‘752) in view of Fulmer et al (US 2005/0269306).
The patented claims of US ‘752 discloses the method claimed including providing a current waveform to a contact tip having a first exit orifice and a second exit orifice, providing a first consumable and a second consumable, the first exit orifice and the second exit orifice are positioned from each other at a distance that facilitates a formation of bridge droplet between the first consumable and the second consumable during the current waveform which inherently including a bridge current wherein the current is divided between the first consumable and the second consumable, and the current flows from the bridge droplet to the weld puddle. But, the claims of US ‘752 do not explicitly disclose the current waveform having the bridge current portion below a spray transition current and a peak current portion above the spray transition current level as claimed.
Fulmer discloses it is known to provide a current waveform having a bridge current portion including a spray transition current that forms a droplet wherein a peak current above the spray transition level transfers or detaches the droplet onto a workpiece/weld puddle (also, see para 0004).
In view of Fulmer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt the patented claims of US ‘752 with the current waveform having the bridge current that is below a spray transition level to predictably form a droplet on the first consumable and the second consumable which would predictably form the bridge droplet wherein the peak current portion of the current waveform above the spray transition current would detach or drop the bridge droplet onto the workpiece or its weld puddle to predictably perform the desired welding operations as such current waveform is known to form and transfer droplet of metal from the consumable/electrodes for welding operations in the art.
The claims of US ‘752 including claims 11, 16 and 18 disclose the recited elements of the pending claims including 2, 4 and 5, respectively, wherein the pending claims are deemed obvious variants of the patented claims of US ‘752 as modified by Fulmer.
Claim 3 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 10-18 of US ‘752 in view of Fulmer as applied to claims 1, 2, 4 and 5 above and further in view of Offer (US 5,714,735).
US ‘752 in view of Fulmer discloses the method claimed except for a wire feeder to drive one or both the consumables.
Offer shows it is known to provide a wire feeder for driving one or more wire electrodes to feed the electrodes/consumable for continued welding operations.
In view of Offer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt the patented claims of US ‘752, as modified Fulmer, with a wire feeder to drive one or both of the first and second consumables to predictably continue welding operations which would require continuous feeding of the electrodes/consumables.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG Y PAIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4783. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30; M-F.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at 571-272-9059. 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.
/SANG Y PAIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761