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 .
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) 1-7, 9,10,12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over French document (FR 2514854) in view of Dolza (US 3969905).
French document ‘854 discloses a pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section transporting and laying apparatus (see Figs. 8,9,11-15) for transporting and laying at a delivery location a pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section for underground installation, comprising:
(a) a mobile unit having a longitudinal central axis and a front end and a rear
end for receiving and unloading the pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section onto and off of the mobile unit, wherein said front end and said rear end can be used interchangeably;
(b) at least one support (7a,7,44) configured to align a weight of the pipe, pipe segment,
or pipe section with said longitudinal central axis upon receiving, holding, transporting and unloading the pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section at said delivery location;
(c) at least one pipe holder (18, Figs. 6,7) with a low-friction surface extending from or
associated with said at least one support for facilitating said receiving, holding,
transporting and unloading of said pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section at said delivery
location, wherein said pipe holder comprises:
(i) a casing-type encasement-type pipe holder which surrounds the
external diameter of said pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section with rollers for at least
a portion of the length of said pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section;
(ii) a cage type encasement-type holder;
(iii) a C-shaped cradle-type holder;
(iv) a horseshoe-shaped encasement-type holder extending from at least
one gantry;
(v) an O-shaped holder;
(vi) a D-shaped cradle-type holder; or
(vii) a tensor-type holder having a pair of overlying roller treads or tread-
type roller;
(d) caterpillar track or tank treads (2,41) , wheels, skids, or sled to carry and move said
apparatus;
(e) an engine or motor (see “self-propelled” throughout machine translation text) configured to drive said caterpillar track or tank treads, wheels or sled or skids. French document ‘854 discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, French document ‘854 is silent about a programmable controller for controlling movement of said apparatus remotely.
Dolza teaches a controller for remotely controlling movement of a pipe laying apparatus (see col. 5). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify French document to include a controller for remotely controlling movement of a pipe laying apparatus as taught by Dolza since such a modification would avoid injury to workers. Further, it would have been considered obvious to have the controller programmable since programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) are widely used in industrial automation systems to control machines and processes. They offer a number of advantages over traditional relay-based control systems, including increased flexibility, reliability and ease of maintenance.
Re claim 2, Dolza suggests the footprint of the apparatus is slightly greater than the diameter of the pipe (see Figs. 1a, 8); however, it does not explicitly state wherein the footprint of said apparatus is no more than six inches greater than the diameter of the pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section the apparatus carries.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify French document (as modified above) to have the footprint of said apparatus is no more than six inches greater than the diameter of the pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section the apparatus carries since such a modification would reduce cost by having wider trenches that is needed.
Re claim 3, the ramp is not needed since its optional. An optional ramp for attaching to said front end or said back end of said mobile unit to aid the uploading or unloading of the pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section.
Re claim 4, wherein at least a length of at least one support (16, Fig. 6 of French document) is adjustable such that a height position of the at least one support or the at least one pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section holder relative to the mobile unit is adjustable.
Re claim 5, wherein said low-friction surface (19) of said pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section holder comprises rollers positioned to be adjacent at least a
portion of said pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section to be held in said holder.
Re claim 6, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify French document (as modified above) to have said caterpillar track or tank treads comprise
natural or synthetic rubber on their surface contacting soil in us since such a modification would not damage the trench surface.
Re claim 7, wherein said mobile platform is extensible (see Figure of French document).
With regards to claims 9,10,12, the apparatus called for in claims 9,10,12 are disclosed by French document above, recited method steps called for in claims 9, 10,12 are disclosed by Dolza; therefore the recited method steps called for in claims 9,10,12 are considered obvious in view of the combination of references above.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over French document ‘854 in view of Dolza as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of German document (DE 202013012405).
French document ‘854 (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, French document ‘854 (as modified above) is silent about wherein said delivery location is at the mouth of a feed hole for introducing the pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section for placement underground using carrier pipe and a drilling rig.
German document '405 teaches said delivery location is at the mouth of a feed hole for introducing the pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section for placement underground using carrier pipe and a drilling rig (see Fig. 3). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify French document (as modified above) to have said delivery location is at the mouth of a feed hole for introducing the pipe, pipe segment, or pipe section for placement underground using carrier pipe and a drilling rig as taught by German document since such a modification would be based on the desired use of the pipe.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is 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 SUNIL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-7051. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-3, F 9-8 and 2nd Sat 11-7.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571 270 5281. 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.
/SUNIL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
SS 2/21/2026