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 Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim1 be found allowable, claim 13 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 2, 5, 7-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Betran Palomas (US PGPub No 2013/0032608).
Regarding claim 1: Betram Palomas teaches a post-tensioning system for a tower of a wind turbine, wherein the tower (1) comprises at least: a vertical axis (figure 3); a concrete tower part (item 5) comprising: an upwind side and a downwind side (figure 3), wherein the upwind side and the downwind side are defined, in use, from a first vertical plane containing the vertical axis and being perpendicular to a predominant wind direction, upwards and downwards respectively, from the first vertical plane; and the system comprising: an upper end (item 20) comprising a first surface and a lower end (item 20’) comprising a second surface; a plurality of tensioning elements (item 10), wherein each one of the tensioning elements comprises a first end located in the upper end and a second end located in the lower end; a first set of anchoring elements (items 20A, B, C, D) configured to anchor the first ends of the tensioning elements towards the first surface; a second set of anchoring elements (items 20’A, B, C, D) configured to anchor the second ends of the tensioning elements towards the second surface; characterised in that wherein the tensioning elements are configured to exert a resultant post-tension force comprising a line of action which intersects with a horizontal plane located at the lower end in a first intersection point upwards from the first vertical plane (paragraphs –37, 0047, and 0048). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to recognize that the system of Betran Palomas would be installable on the particular tower and that it would have been obvious to adjust the tension in any desired manner around the tower in order to counteract forces in specific directions to provide added stability to the tower.
Referring to claim 2: Betran Palomas teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Betran Palomas teaches wherein the first ends and the second ends of the tensioning elements are disposed in a symmetrical way with respect to the first vertical plane (figure 2).
Referring to claim 5: Betram Palomas teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Betram Palomas does not specifically teach wherein each tensioning element comprises a set of strands. However, Betram Palomas teaches the tensioning element is a cable (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that cables are made of a plurality of stands and therefore Betram Palomas teaches the tensioning elements comprises a set of strands.
Referring to claim 7: Betram Palomas teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Betram Palomas teaches wherein a first post-tensioning force that exerts, in use, the tensioning elements disposed upwards from the first vertical plane is greater than a second post-tensioning force that exerts, in use, the tensioning elements disposed downwards from the first vertical plane (paragraphs 0037, 0047, and 0048). It would have been obvious based on Betram Palomas to choose any specific tensioning in order to resist specific forces applied in an installed location.
Referring to claim 8: Betram Palomas teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Betram Palomas teaches wherein the resultant post-tension force is contained in a second vertical plane perpendicular to the first vertical plane, the second vertical plane containing the predominant wind direction (figure 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that the plane of maximum loading shown in figure 3 is perpendicular to the first plane and is aligned with the wind direction.
Referring to claim 9: Betram Palomas teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. They do not specifically teach wherein the resultant post-tension force also intersects with an additional horizontal plane located at the upper end in a second intersection point. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that the post tension force would intersect at the top of the tower as this is the beginning of the tensioning force.
Referring to claim 12: Betram Palomas teaches all the limitations of claim 9 as noted above. Betram Palomas does not teach wherein the first intersection point and/or the second intersection point are located at a distance between 0.1 m and 3m from the first vertical plane. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that the intersection point can be designed to be at any distance from the vertical plane based on the desired loading to counteract a predicted wind load.
Regarding claim 13: Betram Palomas teaches a post-tensioning system for a tower of a wind turbine, wherein the tower (1) comprises at least: a vertical axis (figure 3); a concrete tower part (item 5) comprising: an upwind side and a downwind side (figure 3), wherein the upwind side and the downwind side are defined, in use, from a first vertical plane containing the vertical axis and being perpendicular to a predominant wind direction, upwards and downwards respectively, from the first vertical plane; and the system comprising: an upper end (item 20) comprising a first surface and a lower end (item 20’) comprising a second surface; a plurality of tensioning elements (item 10), wherein each one of the tensioning elements comprises a first end located in the upper end and a second end located in the lower end; a first set of anchoring elements (items 20A, B, C, D) configured to anchor the first ends of the tensioning elements towards the first surface; a second set of anchoring elements (items 20’A, B, C, D) configured to anchor the second ends of the tensioning elements towards the second surface; characterised in that wherein the tensioning elements are configured to exert a resultant post-tension force comprising a line of action which intersects with a horizontal plane located at the lower end in a first intersection point upwards from the first vertical plane (paragraphs –37, 0047, and 0048). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to recognize that the system of Betran Palomas would be installable on the particular tower and that it would have been obvious to adjust the tension in any desired manner around the tower in order to counteract forces in specific directions to provide added stability to the tower.
Referring to claim 14: Betram Palomas teaches a wind turbine comprising the post-tensioned tower of claim 13 (figure 1).
Referring to claim 15: Betram Palomas teaches all the structural limitations of the instant claim as noted in the rejection above. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to recognize that Betram Palomas teaches the method as well based on providing the final product that would be arrived at by the instant method steps.
Referring to claim 16: Betram Palomas teaches all the limitations of claim 15 as noted above. Additionally, Betram Palomas teaches wherein the step of exerting a resultant post-tension force comprising a line of action which intersects with a horizontal plane located at the lower end in a first intersection point upwards from the first vertical plane comprises a step of exerting a first post-tensioning force by means of the tensioning elements disposed upwards from the first vertical plane and a second post-tensioning force by means of the tensioning elements disposed downwards from the first vertical plane, wherein the first post-tensioning force is greater than the second post-tensioning force (figure 3 and paragraphs 0037, 0047, 0048).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 6, 10, 11, 17, and 18 are 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 PATRICK J MAESTRI whose telephone number is (571)270-7859. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7-3.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached at 571-270-3238. 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 J MAESTRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635