DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 Objections
Claims 18-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 18:
This claim claims:
“The invention is a climbing mechanism (1) climbing upwards on the outer surface of a tower (4), wherein it has the characteristics in that;”, see lines 1-2.
This limitation is objected to because the use of “The invention” does not appear to be necessary, as the claim appears to be directed to a climbing mechanism.
Appropriate correction is required.
Further regarding claim 18:
This claim claims:
“outer skid (8) includes; skid columns (42) with U or I section on both sides”, see line 17.
This limitation is objected to because the use of “;” appears to be a grammatical error. Did Applicant intend to claim - outer skid (8) includes:- (with a comma)?
Similarly, the limitation of “U slot group (81) contains;” (line 67) appears to be a grammatical error. Did Applicants intend to claim -a U slot group (81) contains:-?
Appropriate correction is required.
Further regarding claim 18:
The limitation of “cylinder (88) U slot and camera;” (lines 69-70) is objected to because the limitations appears to have a grammatical error. Did Applicants intend to claim -cylinder (88), the U slot and the camera;-?
Similarly, the limitation of “king pin slot” (lines 75-81) is objected to because the limitation appears to have a grammatical error. Did Applicants intend to claim -a king pin slot-?
Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 19:
This claim claims:
“The lock pins (67) on the outer skid (8) hanger parts (39 and 40) are pulled back with
the help of hydraulic cylinders (58) and removed from the holes (119) in the guide rail
(118) and the outer skid (8) is moved up by hydraulic cylinders (26 and 27); the locking
pins (67) are pushed forward by hydraulic cylinders (58) and inserted into the holes
(119) in the guide rail (118); the same operations are done again; by monitoring the
position of the U slots (90) on the side arms (45,46,47,48) from the cameras (83); in the
X axis with the help of hydraulic cylinders (41); in the Z axis with the help of hydraulic
cylinders (77); it is adjusted in the Y axis with the help of hydraulic cylinders (80) and
fixed to the king pins (78) in the tower (4); it includes an elevator (9) that allows the
climbing mechanism (1) to climb up as much as the module height and the same
operations are performed from the end to the beginning for its downward movement.”
See lines 15-25.
This limitation is objected to because the limitation starts with a capital. Thus, the word “The” implies or suggests that the claim has two (2) sentences.
Please amend the claim to change “The” to -the-.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 following claimed limitations (see below) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The claimed limitations not shown are:
“bolt” (see claim 18 line 5)
“bolts” (see claim 18 line 20)
“at least one reinforcement parts” (claim 18 lines 20-21)
“hanger parts” (claim 18 lines 21-22)
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 § 112
Claims 18-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 18, this claim claims “The invention is a climbing mechanism (1) climbing upwards on the outer surface of a tower (4), wherein it has the characteristics in that”, see lines 1-2. The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to “a climbing mechanism” (see line 1).
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims “The invention is a climbing mechanism (1) climbing upwards on the outer surface of a tower (4), wherein it has the characteristics in that;”, see lines 1-2. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because the claim is unclear as to what is meant by the phrase “the characteristics in that”. What is meant by “the characteristics in that”? For this office action, “the characteristics in that” will be considered as referring to -the climbing mechanism comprising-.
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims “it includes a steel construction carrier chassis (17) produced by welding and bolting large number of pipes and profiles to each other”, see lines 3-4. The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1.
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims “wherein the carrier chassis (17) is made in such a way that it can be divided into at least two parts to provide ease of transportation and assembly”, see lines 7-8. The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1.
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims “wherein the carrier chassis (17) is made in such a way that it can be divided into at least two parts to provide ease of transportation and assembly”, see lines 7-8. The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1.
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims “it includes at least one shell (18) with an inner and outer surface, made of steel or composite material, fixed to the carrier chassis (17) by bolts and welding, providing protection from external factors”, see lines 9-11. The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1.
Further regarding claim 18, “the carrier” (see line 14) lacks antecedent basis.
Further regarding claim 18, the limitation of “at least one elevator” (line 14) renders the claim indefinite because the claim is unclear as to whether or not “at least one elevator” refers to 1) the “at least one elevator” of lines 4-5 or 2) at least one second elevator. For this office action, “at least one elevator” of line 14 will be considered as referring to the “at least one elevator” of lines 4-5.
Further regarding claim 18, “the guide rail” (see line 24) lacks antecedent basis.
Further regarding claim 18, the limitation of “one butt bracket” (line 46) renders the claim indefinite because the claim is not clear as to whether or not “one butt bracket” is 1) a separate bracket from the “at least two brackets” of line 42, or 2) referring to the “at least two brackets” of line 42. For this office action, “one butt bracket” will be considered as referring to the “at least two brackets” of line 42.
Further regarding claim 18, “the flanges” (see line 53) lacks antecedent basis.
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims “it includes at least four side arms (45,46,47,48) moving in the X axis by means of hydraulic cylinders (41) in the guide bearings (29) in the outer skid (8)”, see lines 57-58. The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1.
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims “wherein the side arms (45,46,47,48) allow the climbing mechanism (1) to be fixed to the tower (4) and prevent it from wobbling”, see lines 58-60. The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1.
Further regarding claim 18, “the king pin” (see line 73) lacks antecedent basis.
Further regarding claim 18, the limitation of “a king pin bushing” (lines 76-77) renders the claim indefinite because the claim is not clear as to whether or not “a king pin bushing” is 1) a separate bushing from the “a king pin bushing” of line 75, or 2) referring to the “a king pin bushing” of line 75. For this office action, “a king pin bushing” will be considered as referring to the “a king pin bushing” of line 75.
Further regarding claim 18, the limitation of “this ensures that the center axes of the king pin (78) and the U slot (90) are coincident” (see lines 78-79) renders the claim indefinite because the limitation does not appear to further define structure of the climbing mechanism. What structure of the climbing mechanism is being defined by this limitation?
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims “it includes a large number of support bars (131), consisting of connecting parts (122), which are fixed to both ends of a piece of pipe by welding and screws”, see lines 82-83. The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1.
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims:
“king pin slot (123) includes a king pin bushing (124) welded to a metal plate (125)
with bolt holes and flat surfaces, and a king pin (78) fixed with bolts to a king pin
bushing (124); wherein there is an angle (127) between the planes passing through the
foreheads of the king pin bushing (124), half the top angle of the tower; this ensures that
the center axes of the king pin (78) and the U slot (90) are coincident; wherein the king
pin slots (123) and king pins (78) are bolted to the two opposing tower elements (117) of
all tower modules (116,120);
it includes a large number of support bars (131), consisting of connecting parts
(122), which are fixed to both ends of a piece of pipe by welding and screws; wherein
the support bars (131) are bolted to the guide rail (118) and to the flanges (132) of the
tower elements (117) directly opposite, through the holes in the connecting parts (122);
wherein the axes of the support bars (131) pass through planes passing through the centers
of the tower (4) sections; wherein the support bars (131) cause the forces on
the guide rail (118) to become a distributed load”, see lines 75-88.
This limitation renders the claim indefinite because the limitation leaves the claim unclear as to whether not the claimed climbing mechanism requires the structure of the tower. Paragraph 021 (see page 10 lines 14-25) appears to disclose that the king pin slot (123) are fixed to the tower element (117) with bolts (128, see figures 16-18).
If the climbing mechanism requires the king pin slots, king bushing, and metal plate and these structures are fixed to the tower element, then the limitation appears to require the climbing mechanism further comprise the tower. How does the above limitation not require the tower as a part of the climbing mechanism? How do the king pin slots, king bushing, and metal plate further define the structure of the climbing mechanism?
For this office action, this limitation will be interpreted as requiring independent claim 18 to also comprise the structure of a tower as a part of the claimed climbing mechanism.
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims “it includes at least one crane connection platform (3), which has bolt holes enabling the crane (2) to be mounted to the climbing mechanism (1) and is fixed to the carrier chassis (17) by welding and bolts” (see lines 89-91). The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1.
Further regarding claim 18, “the crane” (see line 90) lacks antecedent basis.
Further regarding claim 18, this claim claims “it includes at least one hydraulic tank (20), hydraulic valve group (21) and electrical and electronic control panel (22) mounted on the inside of the carrier chassis (17), enabling remote operation of the climbing mechanism (1) and the crane (2)” (see lines 92-94). The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1.
Regarding claim 19, this claim claims “It is a climbing mechanism (1) according to claim 18” (see line 1). The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1 of claim 18.
Further regarding claim 19, this claim claims “wherein it has the characteristics in that” (see lines 1-2). The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1 of claim 18.
Further regarding claim 19, this claim claims “wherein it has the characteristics in that” (see lines 1-2). This limitation renders the claim indefinite because the claim is unclear as to what is meant by the phrase “the characteristics in that”. What is meant by “the characteristics in that”? For this office action, “the characteristics in that” will be considered as referring to -the climbing mechanism further comprising-.
Further regarding claim 19, the limitation of “U slots” (see lines 12-14) renders the claim indefinite because the limitation is unclear as to whether or not “U slots” refers to 1) the “U slot” of lines 69-70 of claim 18, or refers to 2) a second U slot. For this office action, “U slots” of this claim will be considered as referring to the “U slot” of lines 69-70 of claim 18.
Further regarding claim 19, this claim claims “it is adjusted in the Y axis with the help of hydraulic cylinders (80) and fixed to the king pins (78) in the tower (4);” (see lines 22-23). The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1 of claim 18.
Further regarding claim 19, this claim claims “it includes an elevator (9) that allows the climbing mechanism (1) to climb up as much as the module height and the same operations are performed from the end to the beginning for its downward movement” (see lines 23-25). The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1 of claim 18.
Regarding claim 20, this claim claims “It is a climbing mechanism (1) according to claim 18” (see line 1). The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1 of claim 18.
Further regarding claim 20, this claim claims “wherein it has the characteristics in that” (see lines 1-2). The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1 of claim 18.
Further regarding claim 20, this claim claims “after the first three modules of the tower (4) are mounted with a small crane, the climbing mechanism (1) is mounted in the holes (119) of the guide rail (118) in the tower (4) by means of the lock pins (67) on the outer skid (8) and the inner skid (6) hanger parts (39, 40, 91 and 92), see lines 3-6.
This limitation renders the claim indefinite because the limitation leaves claim 20 unclear as to whether the claim is an apparatus claim or a method/process claim. The limitation appears to at least imply that the claim is a method/process of mounting the climbing mechanism. Further, this limitation renders the claim indefinite because the limitation does not further define the structure of the climbing mechanism. The above limitation appears directed to a method of mounting the climbing mechanism to the tower. Also, is “a small crane” (line 3) the same crane or a different crane than “the crane” (claim 18 line 90)?
Further regarding claim 20, this claim claims “it is adjusted on the X axis with the help of hydraulic cylinders (41), on the Z axis with the help of hydraulic cylinders (77), on the Y axis with the help of hydraulic cylinders (80) and fixed to the king pins (78) on the tower (4)” (see lines 9-12). The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1 of claim 18.
Further regarding claim 20, this claim claims “the elevator (9) of the climbing mechanism (1) is activated and the tower module (116) is moved upwards by its height” (see lines 14-15). This limitation renders the claim indefinite because the limitation implies that the tower module is moved upward by its height. This limitation appears to be inconsistent with the specification because the specification appears to disclose that the climbing mechanism is moved upwards by a height of the tower module. For this office action, this limitation will be interpreted as referring to the climbing mechanism being configured to be movable upwards a height of the tower module.
Further regarding claim 20, this claim claims “the elevator (9) of the climbing mechanism (1) is activated and the tower module (116) is moved upwards by its height” (see lines 14-15). The term “its” renders the claim indefinite because the term “its” is not clear as to what claimed structure “its” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “its” will be considered as referring to the height of the tower module.
Further regarding claim 20, the limitation of “crane” (see lines 16-17) renders the claim indefinite because the limitation is unclear as to whether or not “crane” refers to 1) “the crane” of line 90 of claim 18, or refers to 2) a second crane. For this office action, “crane” of this claim will be considered as referring to the “the crane” of line 90 of claim 18.
Further regarding claim 20, this claim claims “it is a climbing mechanism (1) that is lowered to the ground level and removed from the tower by applying all the processes in its upward movement from the end to the beginning” (see lines 17-19). This limitation renders the claim indefinite because the limitation leaves claim 20 unclear as to whether the claim is an apparatus claim or a method/process claim. The limitation appears to at least imply that the claim is a method/process of lowering and removing the climbing mechanism from the tower. Further, this limitation renders the claim indefinite because the limitation does not further define the structure of the climbing mechanism. The above limitation appears directed to a method/process of lower and removing the climbing mechanism from the tower.
Further regarding claim 20, this claim claims “it is a climbing mechanism (1) that is lowered to the ground level and removed from the tower by applying all the processes in its upward movement from the end to the beginning” (see lines 17-19). The term “it” renders the claim indefinite because the term “it” is not clear as to what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “it” will be considered as referring to the climbing mechanism of line 1 of claim 18.
Further regarding claim 20, this claim claims “it is a climbing mechanism (1) that is lowered to the ground level and removed from the tower by applying all the processes in its upward movement from the end to the beginning” (see lines 17-19). The term “its” renders the claim indefinite because the term “its” is not clear as to what claimed structure “its” refers to in the claim. For this office action, “its” will be considered as referring to the upward movement of the climbing mechanism.
Please review all claims before the formal response is submitted, as any new 112(b) rejections introduced in the response may be grounds for a Final Rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 19-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Kou (CN 107857201A), Soma (JP 2009280367 A), Chen (CN 105197725A), Gomez Mora (US Publication 2021/0155460 A1), and Kalanj et al. (US Publication 2021/0292134 A1) are considered the closest prior art references to the claimed invention of independent claim 18.
As independent claim 18 is almost 3.5 pages long, only the limitations that appear to be allowable (after all claim objections and 112(b) rejections have been addressed) will be presented below.
Claim 18 claims:
“king pin slot (123) includes a king pin bushing (124) welded to a metal plate (125)
with bolt holes and flat surfaces, and a king pin (78) fixed with bolts to a king pin
bushing (124); wherein there is an angle (127) between the planes passing through the
foreheads of the king pin bushing (124), half the top angle of the tower; this ensures that
the center axes of the king pin (78) and the U slot (90) are coincident; wherein the king
pin slots (123) and king pins (78) are bolted to the two opposing tower elements (117) of
all tower modules (116,120);
it includes a large number of support bars (131), consisting of connecting parts
(122), which are fixed to both ends of a piece of pipe by welding and screws; wherein
the support bars (131) are bolted to the guide rail (118) and to the flanges (132) of the
tower elements (117) directly opposite, through the holes in the connecting parts (122);
wherein the axes of the support bars (131) pass through planes passing through the
centers of the tower (4) sections; wherein the support bars (131) cause the forces on
the guide rail (118) to become a distributed load;
it includes at least one crane connection platform (3), which has bolt holes
enabling the crane (2) to be mounted to the climbing mechanism (1) and is fixed to the
carrier chassis (17) by welding and bolts;
it includes at least one hydraulic tank (20), hydraulic valve group (21) and
electrical and electronic control panel (22) mounted on the inside of the carrier chassis
(17), enabling remote operation of the climbing mechanism (1) and the crane (2);
comprising at least one remote control room (5) located on the ground, enabling
remote operation of the climbing mechanism (1) and the crane (2)”, see lines 75-96.
Important Note: The underlining below is provided to point out the important areas of the above limitations.
None of Kou, Soma, Chen, Gomez Mora, nor Kalanj et al. disclose nor would be obvious to the limitations above, in conjunction with the remaining limitations of independent claim 18.
Claims 19-20 depend on claim 18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN J CAMPOS, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5229. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-6pm.
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, Victoria P. Augustine can be reached on phone number (313) 446-4858. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JJC/
/ROBERT W HODGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654