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 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) 1-6, 11, 12, and 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Servadio (WO2021156709A1) in view of Weha (DE 202011002390 U1).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Servadio teaches a welding … apparatus (FIG. 1, welding system 1), comprising: a wearable article (FIG. 1, glove 60).
Servadio fails to teach that the welding…apparatus is a welding fume collection apparatus, comprising: a fume inlet attached to the wearable article; and a fume duct configured to couple the fume inlet to a suction source.
However, Weha teaches that the welding…apparatus is a welding fume collection apparatus (FIG. 1, the assembly of suction device 1), comprising: a fume inlet (FIG. 2, suction end 24) attached to the wearable article (FIG. 2, the suction end 24 is attached to the invention 15 (which is a wearable article)); and a fume duct (FIG. 2, suction hose 23) configured to couple the fume inlet to a suction source (FIG. 2, the suction hose 23 is attached to a suction device that provides the suction).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Servadio by making it so the glove assembly also includes a close-at-hand suction device, as taught by Weha, with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Servadio with these aforementioned teachings of Weha with the motivation of giving greater use to the glove assembly of Servadio.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, the combination of Servadio and Weha teaches that the wearable article comprises a welding glove (Servadio, FIG. 1, claim 1, the glove 60 is a welding glove).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, the combination of Servadio and Weha teaches that he fume inlet is attached to a back of the hand of the welding glove (Weha, FIG. 2, the suction end 24 is connected to the back of the hand portion of the assembly via guide 20).
Regarding claims 4 and 16, the combination of Servadio and Weha teaches that the fume inlet is detachably attached to the wearable article (Weha, FIG. 2, the suction end 24 may be slipped out of the guide 20).
Regarding claims 5 and 17, the combination of Servadio and Weha teaches that the fume inlet is integral to the wearable article (Weha, FIG. 2, the suction end 24 is part of an integral assembly with invention 15).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, the combination of Servadio and Weha teaches that the fume inlet is coupled to the fume duct via at least one of a quick disconnect connection (Weha, “In a further advantageous embodiment, the suction channel can be fastened to the guide and have a connection piece for the releasable attachment of a suction hose at a connection end opposite the suction end.”) or a hose clamp.
Claim(s) 7 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Servadio and Weha as applied to claims 1-6, 11, 12, and 14-17 above, and further in view of Yokoi (JP H11129074 A).
Regarding claims 7 and 18, the combination of Servadio and Weha fails to teach that the fume duct comprises a fastener configured to attach the fume duct to at least one of a welding cable or a second wearable article.
However, Yokoi teaches that the fume duct comprises a fastener (FIG. 7, grip portion 51) configured to attach the fume duct to at least one of a welding cable (FIG. 7, the grip portion 51 connects the vacuum assembly to welding wire 55) or a second wearable article.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Servadio by making it so the glove assembly also connects the suction device to the cabling of the welder, as taught by Yokoi, with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Servadio with these aforementioned teachings of Yokoi with the motivation of consolidating the various wire-like portions of the assembly into one place to reduce potential for tripping.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Servadio and Weha as applied to claims 1-6, 11, 12, and 14-17 above, and further in view of Chantry (EP 3978176 A2).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Servadio and Weha fails to teach that the wearable article is a jacket.
However, Chantry teaches that the wearable article is a jacket (The wiring of a welding system may connect both the welder and the jacket. “The gloves 190 or jacket 191 could communicate a detected contact event to the controller in the wire feeder or power supply in various ways, such as via a wired communication cable or wirelessly or through the torch. Other example types of operator clothing that can employ the sensors 192 or other signal generation circuits include welding shirts, aprons, cape sleeves, pants, etc. The circuitry for detecting contact events and/or generating signals that indicate contact events can be embedded within the articles of clothing so that some penetration of the article of clothing by the wire electrode is required before a contact event signal is transmitted to the controller in the welding system.”).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Servadio by making it so the assembly connects the suction device to a jacket of the welder, as taught by Chantry, with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Servadio with these aforementioned teachings of Chantry with the motivation of connecting the assembly to a sturdier piece of clothing like a jacket.
Claim(s) 9 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Servadio and Weha as applied to claims 1-6, 11, 12, and 14-17 above, and further in view of Lee (KR 200415169 Y1).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, the combination of Servadio and Weha fails to teach a switch configured to control the suction source and attached to at least one of the wearable article, the fume inlet, or the fume duct.
However, Lee teaches a switch configured to control the suction source and attached to at least one of the wearable article (FIG. 1, switch 18 activates the blower and is attached to the mask (an article)), the fume inlet, or the fume duct.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Servadio by making it so the glove 60 includes an activation switch, as taught by Lee, with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Servadio with these aforementioned teachings of Lee with the motivation of making activating and deactivating the assembly convenient.
Claim(s) 10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Servadio and Weha as applied to claims 1-6, 11, 12, and 14-17 above, and further in view of Agosti (US 20150017898 A1).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, the combination of Servadio and Weha fails to teach a damper configured to adjust a flow volume through at least one of the fume inlet or the fume duct.
However, Agosti teaches a damper configured to adjust a flow volume through at least one of the fume inlet or the fume duct (FIG. 2, paragraph 35, a damper is disposed inside manifold 104).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Servadio by making it so the suction duct includes a damper, as taught by Agosti, with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Agosti with these aforementioned teachings of Lee with the motivation of allowing the user to control the rate of suction.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Servadio and Weha as applied to claims 1-6, 11, 12, and 14-17 above, and further in view of Ren (CN 109465575 A).
Regarding claims 13, the combination of Servadio and Weha fails to teach a second welding glove; a second fume inlet attached to the second welding glove; and a second fume duct configured to couple the second fume inlet to the suction source or a second suction source.
However, Ren teaches a second welding glove; a second fume inlet attached to the second welding glove; and a second fume duct configured to couple the second fume inlet to the suction source or a second suction source (FIG. 1, the welding assembly has two suction pipes 25 and 10).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Servadio by making it so there is a second article of clothing, a second inlet, and a second suction pipe, as taught by Ren, with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Servadio with these aforementioned teachings of Ren with the motivation of allowing the user to ventilate gas at two different points.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM C. WEINERT whose telephone number is (571)272-6988. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 ET.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. 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.
/WILLIAM C WEINERT/Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/Allen R. B. Schult/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights