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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/16/2025 has been entered.
Status of Rejections
All previous rejections are withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendments.
New grounds of rejection are necessitated by applicant’s amendments.
Claims 1-13 are pending and under consideration for this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (KR 200175220 Y1, citations based on translation) in view of Hashemi (U.S. 2018/0187314), and further in view of Tan et al. (WO 2023235920 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Cho teaches a portable testing device (see e.g. Fig. 4, electrode assembly 11 for measurement which is positioned as a whole adjacent buried pipe 5, thereby being portable to the designated location; Page 3, bottom paragraph, lines 1-4, and Page 5, lines 1-3) for a corrosion protection system including an anode and a substrate to be protected and an electron source electrically connected to the anode and the substrate to provide electrons to the substrate (see e.g. Fig. 4, anode 6 connected to buried pipe 5 via DC power supply 6 to provide anticorrosive current, i.e. electron, to the buried pipe 5; Page 5, lines 5-8), the testing device comprising:
a housing having an end configured to be positioned over a portion of the corrosion protection system (see e.g. Figs. 3-4, casing 13 of electrode assembly 11 with bottom end positioned on buried pipe 5; Page 3, bottom paragraph, lines 4-5, and Page 5, lines 1-2);
a portable substrate simulator configured to simulate the substrate to be protected (see e.g. Fig. 3, specimen 21 formed of metal with same potential as buried pipe 5 as a part of electrode assembly 11, which is portably placed adjacent pipe 5, as described above; Page 4, paragraph starting “On the other hand…”, lines 1-4, and Page 5, lines 1-3), the substrate simulator supported in the housing proximate the end (see e.g. Figs. 3-4, specimen 21 in bottom end of casing 13 disposed to be adjacent to or contact with buried pipe 5; Page 5, 3rd paragraph, lines 4-6), and
at least one delivery channel configured to deliver an electrolyte to the end between the substrate simulator and the portion of the corrosion protection system to test detection of a current flowing through the corrosion protection system to the substrate simulator via the electrolyte (see e.g. Fig. 3, accommodating space in casing 13 in which an electrolyte solution 15 is held and delivered to the end where specimen 21 is exposed to the outside, and thereby to contact with buried pipe 5 for potential/current measurement, via through hole 43; connecting paragraph of Pages 3-4, lines 5-11, Page 4, paragraph starting “The lower region…”, lines 1-7, and Page 5, 3rd paragraph).
Cho does not explicitly teach the anode being a covering anode electrically insulated from the substrate to be protected, the housing being positioned over a portion of the covering anode, and the electrolyte being delivered between the substrate simulator and covering anode, but does teach the protected substrate being coated with a synthetic resin such as polyethylene (see e.g. Page 2, lines 6-7).
Hashemi teaches a system for cathodic corrosion protection of a metallic object (see e.g. Abstract and Paragraph 0002), comprising a covering anode electrically insulated from the protected metallic object with an electrically isolating coating such as a polymer coating (see e.g. Fig. 1, covering anode 26 and metallic object 38 with electrically isolating coating 34 in between; Paragraph 0030), this system providing a small distance between the anode and cathode, thereby reducing the amount of voltage and current required and resulting in higher effectiveness and lower costs (see e.g. Paragraph 0064).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anode of Cho to be a covering anode electrically insulated from the protected substrate with the insulating polyethylene coating as taught by Hashemi to provide a small distance between the anode and cathode, thereby reducing the amount of voltage and current required and resulting in higher effectiveness and lower costs.
Modified Cho does not teach the portable substrate simulator being connected to the electron source of the corrosion protection system and configured to receive electrons from the electron source, but does teach substrate simulator and the protected substrate having the same potential such that the anticorrosive state of the buried pipe can be accurately determined (see e.g. Cho Page 5, 3rd paragraph, lines 4-7, and 4th paragraph, lines 3-6).
Tan teaches a probe capable of simulating a condition of a metallic structure and measuring a characteristic in response to which cathodic protection applied to the metallic structure is controlled (see e.g. Abstract), wherein the probe is associated with the metallic structure such that they are maintained at the same potential such that corrosion and cathodic protection at the metallic structure also occurs at the probe (see e.g. Page 3, lines 16-19, and Page 10, lines 3-4), and the probe may be electrically coupled to the metallic structure such that current from a rectifier to the metallic structure is also provided to the probe, further facilitating the probe’s ability to simulate the conditions at the metallic structure (see e.g. Page 10, lines 4-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of modified Cho to have the substrate simulator connected to receive the same current, i.e. electrons, from the electron source as the protected substrate as taught by Tan to facilitate the ability of the substrate simulator to simulate the conditions at the protected substrate for accurate determination of the anticorrosive state.
Regarding claim 2, modified Cho teaches a support body configured to support the substrate simulator in the housing at a predefined distance from the end of the housing (see e.g. Cho Figs. 3-4, specimen 21 accommodated at end of casing 13 with coupled lower cover member 19 comprising protrusion 41 which extends therethrough, the specimen disposed to be adjacent or in contact with buried pipe; Page 4, paragraph starting “The lower region…”, lines 1-7, and paragraph starting “On the other…”, lines 4-6, and Page 5, 3rd paragraph, lines 4-6).
Regarding claim 3, modified Cho teaches the at least one delivery channel extending through the support body (see e.g. Cho Fig. 3, through hole 43 in lower cover member 19 for electrolyte solution 19 to pass through; Page 4, paragraph starting “The lower region…”, lines 3-5).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho, Hashemi and Tan, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Mazzeo et al. (U.S. 2016/0363549).
Regarding claim 4, modified Cho teaches all the elements of the testing device of claim 2 as stated above. Modified Cho does not teach the support body further comprising a mechanism to extend the substrate simulator from the support body and retract the substrate simulator into the support body. Cho does however teach the substrate simulator being located adjacent to or in contact with the protected substrate to exclude current resistance drop during measurement (see e.g. Cho Page 5, 3rd paragraph, lines 4-7).
Mazzeo teaches a system supporting a probe for performing electrochemical measurements at a surface (see e.g. Fig. 1, data acquisition system 100 including probe 105; Paragraph 0028, lines 1-7, and Paragraph 0034, lines 12-15), wherein the system comprises a lift mechanism configured to move the probe from a retracted position to a deployed testing configuration (see e.g. Fig. 1, lift mechanism 165; Paragraph 0053, lines 1-6), allowing the probe to be moved to a desired height adjacent the surface of interest during testing while enabling it to be retracted and stowed when not in use, preventing the probe from being damaged or worn (see e.g. Paragraph 0053, lines 6-9, and Paragraph 0054).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of modified Cho to comprise a lift mechanism for moving the substrate simulator probe from a retracted position in its support to an extended deployed position as taught by Mazzeo to allow the probe to be moved to a desired height adjacent the surface of interest during testing while enabling it to be retracted and stowed when not in use, thereby preventing the probe from being damaged or worn.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho, Hashemi and Tan, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kasahara et al. (GB 2025056 A).
Regarding claim 5, modified Cho teaches all the elements of the testing device of claim 1 as stated above. Modified Cho does not explicitly teach at least one spacer at the end of the housing, the at least one spacer configured to space the end of the housing from the covering anode. Cho as modified by Hashemi does however teach that the substrate simulator, which is in the end of the housing, may be provided adjacent to the coated protected substrate upon which the covering anode is provided to be at the same or similar potential (see e.g. Cho Figs. 3-4, specimen 21 at bottom of housing 13 to be near coated buried pipe 5, Page 2, lines 6-8, and Page 5, 3rd paragraph, lines 4-6; see e.g. Hashemi Fig. 1 and Paragraph 0030, protected structure with covering anode 26 at outer surface), and Tan similarly teaches the probe being located not too far from the protected structure to replicate its surface conditions (see e.g. Tan Page 12, lines 25-29).
Kasahara teaches a system for activating corrosive activity of a buried pipe under cathodic protection(see e.g. Abstract) comprising a probe comprising a probe material analogous to the surface of the pipe receiving protection current (see e.g. Page 2, lines 8-20 and 48-51), wherein the probe material may be embedded, i.e. housed, in a plastic resin (see e.g. Fig. 3, probe material 10’ embedded in plastic resin 10’’’; Page 2, lines 45-48) which is then covered on one side with a cover of identical thickness to a coating on the pipe with a specific area exposing the probe material (see e.g. Fig. 3, cover 10a’ on plastic resin 10’’’ exposing area 10a of probe material 10’; Page 2, lines 51-57), thereby allowing the probe to simulate a coating defect of the same dimension which has or may occur (see e.g. Page 2, lines 59-64).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the housing of modified Cho to comprise a cover, i.e. spacer, of the same thickness as the coating on the protected substrate on the end comprising the substrate simulator that exposes a specific surface thereof as taught by Kasahara to enable the testing device to simulate a coating defect of the same dimension which has or may occur.
Regarding claim 6, Cho as modified by Kasahara and Hashemi teaches a thickness of the spacer being equal to a distance between the covering anode and the substrate to be protected (see e.g. Kasahara Page 2, lines 51-55, cover of identical thickness to coating on metal pipe; see e.g. Hashemi Paragraph 0064, lines 1-4, distance between the covering anode and the protected cathodic substrate being as small as the thickness of the electrically insulating coating between the two).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho, Hashemi and Tan, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Goodman et al. (U.S. Patent No. 3,551,801).
Regarding claim 7, modified Cho teaches all the elements of the testing device of claim 1 as stated above. Modified Cho does not teach a contact region comprising a deformable material to conform to the covering anode, but does teach the device having a region in contact with the protected substrate upon which the covering anode is provided (see e.g. Cho Figs. 3-4, specimen 21 at bottom of housing 13 to be near buried pipe 5, Page 5, 3rd paragraph, lines 4-6; see e.g. Hashemi Fig. 1 and Paragraph 0030, protected structure with covering anode 26 at outer surface), as well as the desire for the electrolyte being delivered to the exposed surface of the substrate simulator to not outflow too much (see e.g. Cho Page 4, lines 2-4 and paragraph starting “The lower region…”, lines 5-7).
Goodman teaches an apparatus for testing cathodic protection coatings on a pipe (see e.g. Col. 1, line 36-44, and Col. 1, line 65-Col. 2, line 6) comprising an electrode mounted on the lower end of a head of the device (see e.g. Fig. 4, device with electrode 102 mounted on head 103; Col. 7, lines 6-10) with a gasket fit over the lower surface of the device head which may be pressed, i.e. deformed, against the surface to be inspected this isolating the electrochemical action of the electrode to the area defined by the gasket and maintaining an electrolyte in said area (see e.g. Fig. 4, gasket 104 pressing against surface 108; Col. 7, lines 12-16 and 23-27)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the testing device of modified Cho to comprise a gasket material to be pressed, i.e. deformed, against the protected substrate comprising the covering anode as taught by Goodman to isolate the electrochemical action of the substrate simulator to a defined area and maintain the electrolyte in the defined area to establish effective electrolytic contact.
Regarding claim 8, Cho as modified by Goodman teaches the contact region extending around a perimeter of the end of the housing to maintain the electrolyte between the substrate simulator and the covering anode (see e.g. Goodman Col. 7, lines 12-16 and 23-27, gasket snugly fit over surface to create isolated space filled with electrolyte).
Claims 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho, Hashemi and Tan, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Straub et al. (DE 19749111 A1, citations based on translation).
Regarding claim 9, modified Cho teaches all the elements of the testing device of claim 1 as stated above. Modified Cho does not teach at least one relief channel configured to receive backflow of an excess of the electrolyte, but does teach the device being filled with an electrolyte (see e.g. Cho Page 3, bottom paragraph, lines 4-6).
Straub teaches a measuring cell for electrochemical investigation of a metallic component (see e.g. Paragraph 0001) comprising both a hose for filling the measuring cell with test solution and a hose for emptying the measuring cell (see e.g. Figs. 5-6, hose 60 for emptying and hose 61 for filling measuring cell 20; Paragraph 0059, lines 7-9), the emptying hose being capable of receiving backflow of an excess of the solution, the hoses for emptying and filling allowing replacement of the test solution as needed without operating personnel having direct access to the measuring cell (see e.g. Paragraph 0060, lines 12-15)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the testing device of modified Cho to comprise a hose for emptying the device of electrolyte, i.e. a relief channel, in addition to a hose for filling the device as taught by Straub to allow the electrolyte to be replaced as needed without operating personnel having direct access to the measuring cell.
Regarding claim 13, modified Cho teaches a testing system comprising the testing device of claim 1 (see e.g. Abstract system including electrode assembly for measuring potential of buried pipe).
Modified Cho does not explicitly teach a reservoir configured to contain the electrolyte; and an actuator configured to drive the electrolyte from the reservoir to the at least one delivery channel. Cho does however teach the device being filled with an electrolyte (see e.g. Cho Page 3, bottom paragraph, lines 4-6).
Straub teaches a measuring cell for electrochemical investigation of a metallic component (see e.g. Paragraph 0001), wherein a reservoir filled with test solution and a pump are provided in connection with a hose for filling the measuring cell with test solution and a hose for emptying the measuring cell (see e.g. Figs. 5-6, reservoir 63 and pump 64 connected to hose 60 for emptying and hose 61 for filling measuring cell 20; Paragraph 0060, lines 1-4), allowing replacement of the test solution as needed without operating personnel having direct access to the measuring cell (see e.g. Paragraph 0028 and Paragraph 0060, lines 10-15)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the testing system of modified Cho to comprise a reservoir and pump with associated hoses for filling and emptying of the device as taught by Straub to allow the electrolyte to be replaced as needed without operating personnel having direct access to the measuring cell.
Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho, Hashemi and Tan, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dunn et al. (U.S. 2012/0285827).
Regarding claim 10, modified Cho teaches all the elements of the testing device of claim 1 as stated above. Modified Cho does not explicitly teach a clamp configured to secure the testing device to the covering anode of the corrosion protection system, but does teach the device being positioned along the protected substrate upon which the covering anode is provided (see e.g. Cho Figs. 3-4, specimen 21 at bottom of housing 13 to be near buried pipe 5, Page 5, 3rd paragraph, lines 4-6; see e.g. Hashemi Fig. 1 and Paragraph 0030, protected structure with covering anode 26 at outer surface).
Dunn teaches a cell for performing electrochemical measurements on coated metallic or conductive substrates (see e.g. Abstract), wherein the cell may be removably and nondestructively secured on the substrate by mounting means, i.e. a clamp (see e.g. Dunn Fig. 6, mounting means 198,198’ for securing cell 170 to a surface of substrate 102, Paragraph 0068, lines 1-5), permitting measurements to be made on substrates of indefinite size (see e.g. Paragraph 0054).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the testing device of modified Cho to comprise mounting means, i.e. a clamp, for securing the device to the protected susbtrate covered by the covering anode as taught by Dunn to allow the testing device to be removably and nondestructively secured to substrates of indefinite sizes.
Regarding claim 12, Cho as modified by Dunn teaches the clamp comprising:
two segments configured to be placed around the housing of the test device (see e.g. Dunn Fig. 6, two mounting means 198 and 198’ which together secure the cell 170; Paragraph 0068, lines 1-5) and secured together (see e.g. Dunn Figs. 8 and 10, mounting means shown secured around cell containing analytical chamber 30; Paragraph 0088, lines 2-4); and
two respective suction cups, each suction cup extending from one of the two segments, the two respective suction cups configured to be applied to a substantially flat substrate (see e.g. Dun Fig. 6, suction cups 204 and 204’ on respective mounting means 198 and 198’ for contacting substantially flat substrate 102; Paragraph 0069, lines 3-7, and Paragraph 0072, lines 2-4).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho, Hashemi, Tan and Dunn, as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Scott et al. (U.S. Patent No. 3,553,094).
Regarding claim 11, modified Cho teaches all the elements of the testing device of claim 10 as stated above. Cho as modified by Dunn further teaches the clamp comprising: two segments configured to be placed around the housing of the test device (see e.g. Dunn Fig. 6, two mounting means 198 and 198’ which together secure the cell 170; Paragraph 0068, lines 1-5) and secured together (see e.g. Figs. 8 and 10, mounting means shown secured around cell containing analytical chamber 30; Paragraph 0088, lines 2-4). Modified Cho does not explicitly teach two respective slots, each slot extending through one of the two segments, the two respective slots configured to receive a belt to be secured around a substantially tubular substrate, but does teach that the substrate may be tubular (see e.g. Cho Page 2, lines 5-8, buried pipe for which corrosion is suppressed; see e.g. Dunn Paragraph 0054, lines 4-5, measured surface may be somewhat curved). Dunn further teaches that the two segments may be attached to the substrate by any device capable of releasably and nondestructively securing the cell to the substrate surface (see e.g. Dunn Fig. 6, securing means 204, 204’; Paragraph 0069, lines 6-9).
Scott teaches a device for cathodically protecting a coated metal pipe (see e.g. Col. 1, lines 13-14) comprising an element mounted on a contact member (see e.g. Fig. 1, sacrificial anode 30 cast around, i.e. mounted on, extensions 70 of contact member 25; Col. 4, line 72-Col. 5, line 5), the contact member comprising two segments which each have cutout slots extending therethrough (see e.g. Figs. 1 and 4, legs 64 of contact member 25 each with cutouts 65; Col. 4, lines 34-39) configured to receive a fastening band, i.e. belt, which wraps around the pipe to adjustably secure the contact member to the pipe (see e.g. Figs. 1 and 4, fastening band 32 received in cutouts 32 and secured around pipe 21; Col. 3, line 75-Col. 4, line 3, and Col. 4, lines 37-41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two clamp segments of modified Cho to each comprise a cutout slot configured to receive a fastening band to be secured around a pipe as taught by Scott as a suitable means of adjustably, i.e. releasably, and nondestructively securing the clamp segments to a pipe substrate. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8, filed 07/16/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 103 over Tan, Hashemi and Dunn, particularly regarding the incorporation of Tan into the portable cell structure of Dunn removing the desired same surface condition of Tan, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Cho, Hashemi and Tan.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Polák et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,133,734) discloses a portable sensor for measuring the corrosion endangerment and electrochemical protection of a metal structure buried in an electrolyte, as permanently buried sensors are not always placed advantageously.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOFOLUWASO S JEBUTU whose telephone number is (571)272-1919. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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.
/M.S.J./Examiner, Art Unit 1795
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795