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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 07/15/2024. Claims 1-10 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the following limitations are indefinite:
A) the limitation “openings respectfully formed facing portions of the pair of main tubes” is indefinite because it is unclear how the openings in the main tubes are formed to face the main tubes themselves.
B) the limitation “cap covers respectively coupled to front ends of the pair of main tubes to seal the pair of main tubes” is indefinite because the term “front ends” appears to be already claimed by the previous term “front end portions”, it is unclear if this is intended to be new structure or the same structure as the “front end portions”.
Claims 2-10 are rejected as being dependent on claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “a foreign matter blocking frame provided, at a peripheral edge thereof” is indefinite because the term “thereof” is unclear as to which structure the foreign matter blocking frame is provided to.
Claim 6 is rejected as being dependent on claim 5.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “the dust collection frame is formed with a dust collection port at one side thereof” is indefinite because the term “thereof” is unclear as to which structure the dust collection port is at one side of.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al (WIPO Publication No. WO2015170868) as evidenced by the machine translation, hereinafter referred to as Lee.
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a structure reverse-cutting apparatus [Lee, fig 1] comprising:
a pair of reverse pulley devices [Lee, fig 1, 1], wherein the pair of reverse pulley devices [Lee, fig 4, 1] comprises:
a pair of main tubes [Lee, fig 4, 10] mounted through insertion thereof into two holes such that the main tubes extend through the two holes [Lee, fig 1, 1 is inserted into and extend through hole 210], respectively;
a pair of first support pulleys [Lee, fig 4, 11] respectively mounted to front end portions of the pair of main tubes within the pair of main tubes to rotatably support a wire [Lee, fig 4, 11 is mounted to 10 and 11 supports 100];
a pair of second support pulleys [Lee, fig 4, 12] respectively mounted to rear end portions of the pair of main tubes within the pair of main tubes to rotatably support the wire [Lee, fig 4, 12 is mounted to the rear of 10 and 12 supports 100];
openings respectively formed facing portions of the pair of main tubes to allow movement of the wire [Lee, fig 5, showing openings in 10 to allow 100 to move through 10]; and
cap covers respectively coupled to front ends of the pair of main tubes to seal the pair of main tubes [Lee, fig 5, 13 is coupled at the front (left) side of 10 and at least seals the top portion of 10].
Regarding claim 2, Lee further discloses the structure reverse-cutting apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: a wire supplier configured to be connected to the pair of reverse pulley devices [Lee, fig 1, 300 connected to each 1], wherein the wire supplier comprises: a driver configured to rotate the wire [Lee, fig 2, 310]; and a tension adjuster configured to adjust tension of the wire [Lee, figs 2-3, showing 300 tensions the wire].
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.
Claims 3-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (WIPO Publication No. WO2015170868) as evidenced by the machine translation of Lee, as applied to claims 2 and 1, above, respectively, and in further view of Kim et al (Korean Patent Publication No. KR102057085), as evidenced by the machine translation of Kim, hereinafter referred to as Lee and Kim, respectively.
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses the structure reverse-cutting apparatus according to claim 2, but does not explicitly disclose further comprising: a dust collection frame pivotably mounted to a position adjustment frame coupled to the wire supplier.
Kim teaches a structure reverse-cutting apparatus [Kim, fig 1] comprising:
a pair of reverse pulley devices [Kim, fig 1, 200], wherein the pair of reverse pulley devices comprises:
a pair of main frames mounted through insertion thereof into two holes such that the main frames extend through the two holes, respectively [Kim, fig 1, 300];
a pair of first support pulleys respectively mounted to front end portions of the pair of main tubes within the pair of main frames to rotatably support a wire [Kim, fig 2, 210, which is attached to 300 at the front and which 210 supports wire 100];
a pair of second support pulleys respectively mounted to rear end portions of the pair of main tubes within the pair of main tubes to rotatably support the wire [Kim, fig 2, 220, which is attached to 300 at the rear and which 220 supports 100];
a wire supplier configured to be connected to the pair of reverse pulley devices [Kim, fig 2, and page 18, pp 0037, 237]; and
a dust collection frame [Kim, fig 1, 600] pivotably mounted to a position adjustment frame [Kim, fig 1, coupled to an excavator] coupled to the wire supplier [Kim, fig 1, 600 and the excavator are all coupled to 100 via at least intermediate members].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a dust collection frame as taught by Kim with the wire saw apparatus of Lee because this allows the user to prevent cooling fluid in contact with the structure from leaking [Kim, page 21, pp 0042, summarized].
Regarding claim 4, Lee as modified further discloses the structure reverse-cutting apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the position adjustment frame [Kim, figs 1 and 3, the excavator] is separably coupled to a mounting frame coupled to the wire supplier [Kim, fig 3, the excavator is separably coupled 320 via at least intermediate members, which is coupled to 100 via at least intermediate members].
Regarding claims 5-6, Lee discloses the structure reverse-cutting apparatus according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose further comprising: a foreign matter blocking frame provided, at a peripheral edge thereof, with a rubber packing to seal a gap between the foreign matter blocking frame and a structure wall (clm 5), and wherein the foreign matter blocking frame comprises: a fastening plate formed with a plurality of fastening holes spaced apart from one another by a predetermined distance; and a pair of fixing plates fastened to the fastening plate in a position-adjusted state and configured to support the main tubes of the reverse pulley devices coupled thereto, respectively (clm 6).
Kim teaches a structure reverse-cutting apparatus [Kim, fig 1] comprising:
a pair of reverse pulley devices [Kim, fig 1, 200], wherein the pair of reverse pulley devices comprises:
a pair of main frames mounted through insertion thereof into two holes such that the main frames extend through the two holes, respectively [Kim, fig 1, 300];
a pair of first support pulleys respectively mounted to front end portions of the pair of main tubes within the pair of main frames to rotatably support a wire [Kim, fig 2, 210, which is attached to 300 at the front and which 210 supports wire 100];
a pair of second support pulleys respectively mounted to rear end portions of the pair of main tubes within the pair of main tubes to rotatably support the wire [Kim, fig 2, 220, which is attached to 300 at the rear and which 220 supports 100];
further comprising: a foreign matter blocking frame provided [Kim, fig 1, 400], at a peripheral edge thereof [Kim, fig 1, 400 is coupled at a peripheral edge], with a rubber packing to seal a gap between the foreign matter blocking frame and a structure wall [Kim, page 23, 0045] (clm 5), and
wherein the foreign matter blocking frame comprises: a fastening plate formed with a plurality of fastening holes spaced apart from one another by a predetermined distance [Kim, fig 3, 310]; and a pair of fixing plates fastened to the fastening plate in a position-adjusted state and configured to support the main tubes of the reverse pulley devices coupled thereto, respectively [Kim, page 24, pp 0047] (clm 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the foreign matter blocking frame as taught by Kim with the wire saw apparatus of Lee because this structure is instrumental in preventing the cooling fluid that comes in contact with the structure being cut from leaking [Kim, page 21, pp 0042, summarized].
Regarding claim 7, Lee as modified further discloses the structure reverse-cutting apparatus according to claim 3, wherein: the dust collection frame is formed with a dust collection port at one side thereof [Kim, fig 2, 600 is formed at a collection on one side]; and the wire supplier is connected to the dust collection port by a hose to collect dust generated during a cutting task [Kim, fig 7, showing hoses collecting dust connected to 810, 710, and 720].
Regarding claim 8, Lee as modified further discloses the structure reverse-cutting apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the dust collection frame comprises a plurality of guide pulleys disposed in the dust collection frame to guide movement of the wire [Kim, fig 2, pulleys between 203 and 220].
Regarding claim 10, Lee as modified further discloses the structure reverse-cutting apparatus according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the structure reverse- cutting apparatus comprises a power plant structure reverse-cutting apparatus.
Kim teaches a structure reverse-cutting apparatus [Kim, fig 1] comprising:
a pair of reverse pulley devices [Kim, fig 1, 200], wherein the pair of reverse pulley devices comprises:
a pair of main frames mounted through insertion thereof into two holes such that the main frames extend through the two holes, respectively [Kim, fig 1, 300];
a pair of first support pulleys respectively mounted to front end portions of the pair of main tubes within the pair of main frames to rotatably support a wire [Kim, fig 2, 210, which is attached to 300 at the front and which 210 supports wire 100];
a pair of second support pulleys respectively mounted to rear end portions of the pair of main tubes within the pair of main tubes to rotatably support the wire [Kim, fig 2, 220, which is attached to 300 at the rear and which 220 supports 100];
wherein the structure reverse- cutting apparatus comprises a power plant structure reverse-cutting apparatus [Kim, page 2, pp 0001].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the wire saw apparatus of Lee with the power plant structure of Kim because this structure is helpful in decommissioning power plants when the lifespan is over [Kim, page 6, pp 0009, summarized].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 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: Regarding claim 9, Lee et al (WIPO Publication No. WO2015170868) teaches a cap to protect the pulleys [Lee, fig 12, 13]. However, Lee does not teach a separate plug used to seal openings to the structure.
Therefore, the prior art considered as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipates nor renders obvious “wherein each of the pair of the reverse pulley devices further comprises a plug member separably mounted to a front end portion of a corresponding one of the openings to seal the opening and a structure wall from each other during cutting” together in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claim and in the independent claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT NEIBAUR whose telephone number is (571)270-7979. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/ROBERT F NEIBAUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights