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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (claims 1-6, 10-15, 17-21) in the reply filed on 7/28/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 objected to because of the following informalities: “one of a plurality of advancement devices” should be corrected as --one of a plurality of the advancement devices--. 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 11-14, 17-20 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 11: Claim 11 recites “as it passes through the line blower assembly”. However, the term “it” renders the scope of the claim indefinite. For examination purposes, “as it passes” is interpreted as --as [[it]]the transmission line passes--.
Claims 12-14, 17-20 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
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) 1-6, 10-11, 15, 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Radichel et al (US 11,025,039 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Radichel et al (‘039) discloses an advancement device for advancing a transmission line 110 (col.5 lines57-58) within a transmission line installation system 100 (col.5 line52) comprising:
a local controller 160 (col.11 line58) operable to locally control the advancement device, the local controller 160 comprising a processing device (col.11 line59), a computer-readable storage device (col.11 line59, “a memory device”, col.15 lines47-48, “memory devices including computer-readable storage devices”), and a communication device (col.11 line60);
an advancement device drive assembly 360 (col.21 line10) operably coupled to the local controller 160, the advancement device drive assembly 360 configured to receive the transmission line 110 from a transmission line source 102 (col.5 line54) and advance the transmission line from an inlet 356 (col.21 line9) to a line blower assembly 252 (col.21 line8);
the line blower assembly 252 operably coupled to the local controller 160, the line blower assembly 252 configured to receive the transmission line 110 from the advancement device drive assembly 360 and advance the transmission line 110 to an outlet 358 (col.21 line8, col.21 lines30-32, fig19); and
a transmission line sensor (col.22 lines25-27, “optical counter”) configured to sense a presence of the transmission line 110 (col.22 lines25-27), wherein the local controller 160 is configured to instruct the advancement device drive assembly 360 to frictionally engage the advancement device drive assembly 360 with the transmission line 110 when the transmission line sensor senses the presence of the transmission line 110.
Regarding claim 2, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 1, wherein the advancement device drive assembly 360 is configured to frictionally engage the transmission line 110 with a tractor drive 308 (col.20 line49), wherein the tractor drive 308 is configured to frictionally engage the transmission line 110 using an actuator (col.23 lines10-17).
Regarding claim 3, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 1, wherein the transmission line source 102 is a transmission line reel 108 (col.5 line57) configured to supply the transmission line 110 to the advancement device.
Regarding claim 4, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 1, wherein the transmission line source 102 is an upstream advancement device that is configured to supply the transmission line 110 to a downstream advancement device within the transmission line installation system 100 (fig19).
Regarding claim 5, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 2, wherein the tractor drive 308 (figs18-19) further comprises an upper tractor drive 322 (col.23 line10) and a lower tractor drive 324 (col.23 line10).
Regarding claim 6, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 5, wherein the actuator further comprises a clamp cylinder 379 (col.23 lines34-35) configured to provide a normal force to the lower tractor drive 324 to frictionally engage the upper tractor drive 322 and the lower tractor drive 324 with the transmission line 110 (col.23 lines36-39).
Regarding claim 10, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 2, wherein the actuator is electrically, hydraulically, or pneumatically powered (col.23 lines11-12, 35).
Regarding claim 11, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 1, wherein the transmission line sensor further comprises an optical sensor (col.22 lines25-26) configured to read markings (col.2 lines26-27) on an exterior of the transmission line 110 as the transmission line 110 passes through the line blower assembly 252 (col.22 lines25-27).
Regarding claim 15, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 1, wherein the transmission line sensor further comprises an electric sensor (“optical counter”) or a mechanical sensor.
Regarding claim 17, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 11, wherein the transmission line sensor is configured to calculate a speed of the transmission line 110 by reading the markings on the exterior of the transmission line 110 and calculating a number of markings that pass per unit of time, wherein the markings are separated from one another by a predetermined distance (col.22 lines25-41).
Regarding claim 18, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 17, wherein the advancement device is one of a plurality of the advancement devices each including the local controller 160 configured to communicate the speed of the transmission line 110 using a global controller 121 (col.11 line53) that receives information from the local controllers 160 (col.11 lines53-54, col.11 line64-col.12 line6).
Regarding claim 19, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 18, wherein the global controller 121 is configured to process the speed of the transmission line 110 from the local controllers 160 and communicate a synchronized speed to each of the local controllers 160.
Regarding claim 20, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 19, wherein the local controllers 160 are configured to control the advancement device drive assembly to advance the transmission line at the synchronized speed (col.12 lines59-66).
Regarding claim 21, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 2, wherein the actuator further comprises a proximity switch configured to measure a position of the tractor drive 308 (col.23 liens23-39).
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) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radichel et al (US 11,025,039 B2) in view of Barker (US 6,364,290 B1).
Regarding claims 12-14, Radichel et al discloses the advancement device of claim 11, however, does not explicitly disclose further limitations of the optical sensor recited in claims 12-14. Barker (‘290) teaches that the term, “optical” includes light from the visible spectrum as well as infra-red radiation, wherein the optical sensor (col.5 lines45-46) including a light emitter and detector (col.5 lines45-53, col.6 lines51-53) configured to emit light and detect a drop in voltage at a light sensor when the light is blocked by the transmission line, wherein the light is infrared light or visible light (col.5 lines45-54). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Radichel et al to use the optical sensor as recited in claims 12-14, as taught by Barker, as such limitations and performances are known limitations and performances of “optical” sensors.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Seahee Hong whose telephone number is (571)270-5778. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-4pm ET.
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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/SEAHEE HONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights