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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 objected to because of the following informalities: there is an “]” after the word platform. Appropriate correction 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 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Geraets et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0056592).
As per claim 1, Geraets teaches a method of replacing a component of an offshore wind turbine, the offshore wind turbine including an onboard crane having a maximum working distance, the method comprising:
-providing a sea vessel adjacent the offshore wind turbine (Geraets: figure 1) including a transport system unattached to the wind turbine, the transport system [[(50)]] comprising:
-a base connected to a deck of the sea vessel (Geraets: figure 10, 78, 79);
-an elongate platform connected to the base for supporting the platform; and
-at least one transport frame (75) carried on the elongate platform for receiving a component of the offshore wind turbine and being movable relative to the base [[(52)]] between a retracted position and an extended position, the retracted position locating the at least one transport frame over the deck of the sea vessel, and the extended position locating the at least one transport frame over water at a distance (d) away from the deck of the sea vessel (Geraets: para. 128-130; figure 1; Transporting the carriage to the tower using rails.),
-wherein the sea vessel is positioned such that the deck of the sea vessel is separated from the wind turbine by a distance (D) greater than the maximum working distance of the onboard crane (Geraets: para. 136), and
-wherein the sea vessel is positioned such that when the at least one transport frame is in the extended position, at least part of the at least one transport frame is within the maximum working distance of the onboard crane and when the at least one transport frame is in the retracted position, the at least one transport frame is outside of the maximum working distance of the onboard crane (Geraets: para. 134);
-arranging the at least one transport frame in the extended position (Geraets: para. 137; figure 10; Carriage adjusting the position to engage with the tower.);
-lowering a component of the offshore wind turbine using the onboard crane (Geraets: para. 146); and
-with the at least one transport frame in the extended position, placing the component on the at least one transport frame of the transport system (Geraets: para. 145-146).
PNG
media_image1.png
347
559
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
383
637
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As per claim 2, the method of claim 1 is as described. Geraets further teaches further comprising:
-moving the at least one transport frame from the extended position to the retracted position such that the component is located over the deck of the sea vessel (Geraets: figures 1 and 10); and
-with the at least one transport frame in the retracted position, removing the component from the transport system (Geraets: para. 146).
As per claim 3, the method of claim 1 is as described. Geraets further teaches further comprising:
-placing another component on the at least one transport frame of the transport system (Geraets: para. 77); and
-moving the at least one transport frame from the retracted position to the extended position such that the another component is located over water (Geraets: para. 77).
As per claim 4, the method of claim 3 is as described. Geraets further teaches further comprising, with the at least one transport frame in the extended position, raising the another component from the at least one transport frame using the onboard crane of the offshore wind turbine (Geraets: para. 146).
As per claim 5, the method of claim 3 is as described. Geraets further teaches wherein the at least one transport frame includes a first transport frame and a second transport frame (Geraets: para. 128; figure 7a), and
-wherein the step of placing the component on the at least one transport frame further comprises placing the component on the first transport frame (Geraets: para. 128-130; figure 7a),
-wherein the step of placing the another component on the at least one transport frame further comprises placing the another component on the second transport frame (Geraets: para. 128-130; figure 7a), and
-wherein the another component is placed on the second transport frame prior to the component being placed on the first transport frame (Geraets: para. 128-130; figure 7a).
PNG
media_image3.png
439
687
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As per claim 6, the method of claim 2 is as described. Geraets further teaches wherein the at least one transport frame is fixed to the platform], and wherein moving the at least one transport frame between the extended position and the retracted position further comprises moving the platform relative to base (Geraets: para. 128-130; figure 7a).
As per claim 7, the method of claim 2 is as described. Geraets further teaches wherein the platform includes a track [[(90a, 90b)]], and wherein the transport system further comprises a carriage movably connected to the track, the carriage including the at least one transport frame, and wherein moving the at least one transport frame between the extended position and the retracted position further comprises moving the carriage relative to the track (Geraets: para. 128-130; figure 7a).
As per claim 8, the method of claim 1 is as described. Geraets further teaches wherein the platform includes a first platform segment and a second platform segment [[([[156)]], the second platform segment being rotatably coupled to the first platform segment and rotatable between a raised position and a lowered position, and wherein the method further comprises positioning the second platform segment in the lowered position prior to or contemporaneous with the step of arranging the at least one transport frame in the extended position (Geraets: figure 1; figure 7a).
Claims 9-11 recite substantially similar limitations as those already addressed in claims 1, 6, and 7, and, as such, are rejected for similar reasons as given above.
As per claim 12, the system of claim 9 is as described. Geraets further teaches further comprising a drive device for moving the at least one transport frame between the retracted position and the extended position (Geraets: para. 35).
As per claim 13, the system of claim 9 is as described. Geraets further teaches wherein the at least one transport frame includes a first transport frame and a second transport frame arranged in a side-by-side manner (Geraets: figure 7a).
As per claim 14, the system of claim 13 is as described. Geraets further teaches wherein the platform defines a longitudinal direction parallel to the elongate extent of the platform, and wherein the first and second transport frames are arranged side-by-side in the longitudinal direction (Geraets: figure 7a).
As per claim 15, the system of claim 13 is as described. Geraets further teaches wherein the platform defines a transverse direction perpendicular to the elongate extent of the platform, and wherein the first and second transport frames are arranged side-by-side in the transverse direction (Geraets: figure 7a).
As per claim 16, the system of claim 9 is as described. Geraets further teaches wherein the platform further comprises:
-a first platform segment (Geraets: figure 7a);
-a second platform segment (Geraets: figure 7a); and
-a pivot mechanism connecting the first platform segment and the second platform segment and permitting rotational movement of the second platform segment relative to the first platform segment between a raised position and a lowered position (Geraets: para. 55; para. 77).
Claim 17 recites substantially similar limitations as those already addressed in claim 9, and, as such, are rejected for similar reasons as given above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al. – KR 20190128432A – Teaches a ship for transporting and installing at an offshore wind turbine.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEETAL R. PAULSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1368. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Marc Jimenez can be reached at (571) 272-4530. 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.
/SHEETAL R PAULSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615