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 with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 7/23/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Groups I and II have a unity of invention. This is not found persuasive because the amendments fail to establish there is a same special technical feature. As set out below, the claimed features are not special.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the smaller radius of claim 5; the suction buckets of claim 9, and both iterations of claim 10 (only part A being a opening/part B being a pin is shown) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan et al. (US 20210172139) in view of Henderson (US 7707797).
CLAIM 1: Duncan discloses a support structure for an offshore platform (the preamble citation of “wind turbine” does not offer any structural limitation to the claim and thus is not given patentable weight). The support structure (Fig. 2) comprises a first structure part (210) configured to be fixed to the seabed (120), said first structure part comprising at least three dummy legs (215) distributed regularly on a first circle having as a center a longitudinal axis of the support structure and extending along said longitudinal axis of the support structure (see Fig. 2). Said dummy legs comprising a lower extremity (bottoms of 215) designed to face the seabed and an upper extremity (tops of 215) opposed to the lower extremity. The first circle being defined by the lower extremity of the dummy legs (Fig. 2). The first structure part also comprising at least three anchor devices (205) to the seabed linked to the at least three dummy legs. A second structure part (300) comprising a lower extremity (base of 300, such as frame 315), attached to the upper extremity of the at least three dummy legs of the first structure part (as shown in Fig. 1).
Duncan fails to disclose wherein at least one anchor device of the first structure part is positioned angularly between two adjacent dummy legs on a second circle having as a center the longitudinal axis of the support structure, and wherein the first structure part comprises only one anchor device to the seabed between two adjacent dummy legs and wherein an angle between a radius of the second circle joining the one anchor device and radii of the first circle joining the two dummy legs surrounding said anchor device, is the same.
Henderson discloses a subsea foundation.
Henderson discloses a subsea base (52). The base has legs (5) to support an upper structure. The base is anchored via piles (47). The anchors and legs are arranged such that each makes a circle with the center being the longitudinal axis of the support structure. The anchors are between the legs.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base of Duncan to have the concentric circle anchors and legs with a reasonable expectation of success as the substitution of one base geometry for another in which the base would continue to serve the same function of securing the supports to the seabed.
Henderson teaches the number of piles and supports can vary. One of ordinary skill in the art would arrange them in an alternating, equal distance pattern as described to space out the forces equally in the circle pattern.
CLAIM 4: The second circle comprising the anchor devices to the seabed of the first structure part has a larger radius than the first circle comprising the dummy legs (see Henderson, Fig. 1).
CLAIM 5: Duncan-Henderson fails to disclose wherein the second circle comprising the anchor devices to the seabed of the first structure part has a smaller radius than the first circle comprising the dummy legs.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the relative diameters of the circles as a rearrangement of parts. Each part would still perform the same anchor or support function as it does in the disclosed embodiment. Applicant has not offered any unexpected difference between the two relative circle dimension choices.
CLAIM 6: Duncan-Henderson fails to disclose wherein the second circle comprising the anchor devices to the seabed of the first structure part and the first circle comprising the dummy legs have the same radius.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the relative diameters of the circles as a rearrangement of parts. Each part would still perform the same anchor or support function as it does in the disclosed embodiment. Applicant has not offered any unexpected difference between the two relative circle dimension choices.
CLAIM 7: The anchor devices to the seabed are sleeves configured to receive and to be fixed to piles designed to be driven or drilled into the seabed (see Henderson, Fig. 2).
CLAIM 8: Henderson fails to disclose wherein at least one extremity of the sleeves comprises a guiding portion for the pile.
Examiner takes official notice that guides are well known in the art as a manner of simplifying installation.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sleeve of Henderson to have a known guide with a reasonable expectation of success to simplify the process of installing the pile into the sleeve.
CLAIM 9: The anchor devices to the seabed are suction buckets (Duncan, suction cans 205).
CLAIM 10: The upper extremity of the dummy legs of the first structure part comprises a pin and the lower extremity of the second structure part comprises a receiving opening, wherein the pin and the receiving opening are configured to fit together (see Duncan, Figs. 1, 2 showing male/female connection).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited art shows similar structures anchoring a base to a seabed and allowing for connections to a further support.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK F LAMBE whose telephone number is (571)270-1932. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10-4.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571)270-7741. 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.
/PATRICK F LAMBE/Examiner, Art Unit 3676
/TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
