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 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.
Claim(s) 1-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grandauer (US 6,443,385 B1) in view of Mordeglia (US 2018/0305168 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 16, Grandauer discloses a winding system of a rolled product (Fig. 1; Col. 3, Ln. 7-9, winding material WM) comprising:
a winder (Fig. 1; Col. 3, Ln. 7-9, winding shaft AX) comprising:
a winding spool (Fig. 1; Col. 3, Ln. 7-9, drum SP), and
spool rotation means for rotating the spool around a rotation axis (Col. 1, Ln. 57-67),
a distributor to guide the positioning of the rolled product towards the spool at an instantaneous winding point, and including a product feed outlet (Fig. 1; Col. 3, Ln. 26-30, guiding means FE);
distributor translation means for moving the distributor with respect to the spool so that the product feed outlet performs an alternating translational movement of the spool parallel to the rotation axis to distribute the rolled product on the spool and vary over time the instantaneous winding point of the rolled product on the spool and on the coil in formation (Fig. 1; Col. 15, Ln. 8-30, boom AFE and traverse arm FEA corresponding to distributer translation means),
a control and command unit which is configured to control the translation means in a coordinated manner, in accordance with a predefined winding program which is a function of predefined reference operating parameters storable by said control and command unit and of operating parameters which are acquirable in real time during winding by the control and command unit by a detector of the winding system (Col. 5, Ln. 62-67; Col. 6, Ln. 1-3, control circuit and computer unit CU, and video camera VC corresponding to a detector),
wherein said detector comprises at least one laser triangulation profilometer which is substantially arranged in a position diametrically opposite to the distributor with respect to the spool and is configured to continuously detect a surface profile of the coil of the rolled product at every added turn, wherein said profilometer is oriented with respect to said spool to scan a coil surface in a position angularly displaced around the rotation axis with respect to said instantaneous winding point of the rolled product (Fig. 2; Col. 14, Ln. 18-42, light source LS and laser LSA corresponding to a laser triangulation profilometer),
a processing and calculation unit which, based on the surface profile of the coil of the rolled product detected by the profilometer at every added turn, is configured to feedback adjust the translation means of the distributor to minimize a difference between an actual operating parameter calculated based on the profile of the coil in formation detected by said profilometer and a same operating parameter calculated based on theoretical data related to a predefined ideal winding of the coil (Col. 5, Ln. 62-67; Col. 6, Ln. 1-3, wherein the computer unit CU does the evaluation and calculations of the provided parameters), but fails to disclose control the rotation and translation speeds. However, Mordeglia teaches the control and command unit adjusting the rotation means and the translation speed (Pg. 3, ¶82). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the adjustment of the rotation means and the translation speed in order to provide the system with a variety of adjustment parameters to ensure near perfect rod winding.
Regarding claims 2 and 17, Grandauer discloses wherein said actual operating parameter, calculated based on the profile of the coil in formation detected by said profilometer at every added turn, is an actual height of an nth layer of the coil in formation at every further turn added with respect to one of two opposite axial ends of the spool, or an actual growth rate of each nth layer at every further turn added (Col. 6, Ln. 4-51 describing the reading and adjustment of height parameters per layer).
Regarding claims 3 and 18, Grandauer discloses wherein said predefined winding program is aimed at feedback adjusting the translation means of the distributor so that the actual height is substantially equivalent to the theoretical height of the nth layer of the coil in formation at every further turn added, said theoretical height being calculated based on values of a diameter of the rolled product previously made available to the processing and calculation unit, as a function of the spool height, or translation means of the distributor is substantially equivalent to the actual growth rate of each nth layer at every further turn added (Figs. 2-4; Col. 6, Ln. 4-51).
Regarding claim 4, Grandauer discloses wherein an orientation position of said profilometer with respect to said spool for scanning the coil surface is angularly displaced around the rotation axis by a predetermined angle with respect to said instantaneous winding point of the rolled product (Fig. 1; Col. 5, Ln. 51-61). While Grandauer does not specifically disclose an angle of the profilometer, it is noted by figure 1, that the light band LB of the light source LS is angled at range between 0 to 60 degrees from the video camera VC and thus understood that the angle of the light source LS with respect to the coil surface is greater than 60 degrees. Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to displace the profilometer at an angle of between 75 to 105 degrees, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In other words, narrowing a general condition taught by the prior art to a specific numerical value has been held to be an obvious variation thereof. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 and In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215. Adjusting such an angle provide the user an advantageous when measuring varyingly sized rods or cables.
Regarding claims 5 and 19, Grandauer discloses wherein said at least one laser triangulation profilometer is configured to detect for each turn a radial distance from the rotation axis of the spool and a height position along the rotation axis (Figs. 2-4; Col. 6, Ln. 4-51; Col. 14, Ln. 18-42 wherein the laser LSA from the light source LS is configured to assist the video camera VC in the detection and repositioning).
Regarding claim 6, Grandauer discloses wherein said at least one laser triangulation profilometer is electronically manageable to scan inside a scanning window having a height lower than a height of the spool along the rotation axis, said scanning window being movable parallel to the rotation axis to follow the coil in formation at every added turn (Figs. 2-3, 5, & 7; Col. 7, Ln. 62-67; Col. 8, Ln. 1-10; Col. 9, ln. 46-61, evaluation window AF).
Regarding claim 7, Grandauer discloses wherein said at least one laser triangulation profilometer is configured to update the position of the scanning window with a delay (Col. 7, Ln. 62-67; Col. 8, Ln. 1-10; & Col. 10, Ln. 47-52). While Grandauer fails to discloses a delay between 10 and 50 ms, it is clearly stated that there is a time needed for evaluation. Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to set a delay between 10 to 50 ms, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In other words, narrowing a general condition taught by the prior art to a specific numerical value has been held to be an obvious variation thereof. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 and In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215. Setting a delay allows for all the elements of the system to catch up with the fast-paced calculations of the computer.
Regarding claim 8, Grandauer fails to disclose wherein said at least one laser triangulation profilometer has a minimum scanning frequency of 300 Hz. However, Grandauer does disclose the scanning and reading process being “as quick as possible” (Col. 7, Ln. 62-67; Col. 8, Ln. 1-10). While this does not necessarily relate to a frequency, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a minimum frequency of 300 Hz, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In other words, narrowing a general condition taught by the prior art to a specific numerical value has been held to be an obvious variation thereof. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 and In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215. Setting the scanning frequency to a minimum of 300 Hz would allow for a fast pace of data transfer.
Regarding claim 9, Grandauer discloses wherein said detector further comprises an online meter of a diameter of the rolled product, said meter being configured to continuously measure the diameter of the rolled product and being placed upstream of the distributor along a feed line of the rolled product and wherein the processing and calculation unit is configured to use measurements of the diameter of the rolled product made by said meter as values of the diameter of the rolled product (Col. 7, Ln. 46-53).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Grandauer discloses comprising obtaining the value of the diameter of the rolled product from continuous measurements on the rolled product by an online meter placed upstream of the distributor along a feed line of the rolled product, wherein each diameter measurement is related to a respective detection time (Fig. 1; Col. 7, Ln. 46-67; Col. 8, Ln. 1-10).
Regarding claims 11, 13, 21 and 23, Grandauer discloses wherein retroactive adjustment of the translation means of the distributor uses predefined reference operating parameters storable by said control and command unit, which consist of spool diameter, spool height, and diameter of the rolled product (Col. 5, Ln. 12-25; Col. 6, Ln. 4-23; Col. 7, Ln. 46-67), but fails to discloses consisting of linear speed of the rolled product along the feed line of the rolled product. However, Mordeglia teaches adjustment of the translation means using parameters consisting of linear speed of the rolled product along the feed line of the rolled product (Pg. 3, ¶¶ 75 & 82). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the parameters of linear speed of the rolled product along the feed line for the adjustment of the distributor in order to allow for further control of the winding process to ensure secure and efficient winding while further ensuring minimal gaps.
Regarding claims 12 and 22, Grandauer discloses wherein the processing and calculation unit is configured to use preset values, storable by said control and command unit, as values of the diameter of the rolled product (Col. 10, Ln. 17-32; Col. 10, Ln. 53-57).
Regarding claims 14-15 and 24-25, Grandauer fails to disclose a function which incorporates translation and rotation speed. However, Mordeglia teaches wherein for every nth layer of the coil in formatting the processing and calculation unit is configured to initialize translation speed of the distributor at a theoretical translation speed, which is calculated as a function of winding time of a turn in said nth layer, and number of turns in said nth layer, and wherein for every nth layer of the coil in formation the processing and calculation unit is configured to adjust the rotation speed of the spool as a function of linear speed of the rolled product along a feed line of the rolled product, and diameter of the spool or of the (n-1)th layer of the coil in formation (Pg. 3, ¶¶ 66-67, & 82; Pg. 4, ¶¶93-102). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated a function of translation and rotation speeds into the processing and calculation unit’s algorithm in order to provide fine adjustment of the winding of material.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art references refer to a winding system which senses and adjust thew winding of the material. Each of the cited reference refer to the measuring and storing of specific parameters which are essential to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERMIA E MELIKA whose telephone number is (571)270-5162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM - 6:00 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, Victoria P. Augustine can be reached at (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 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.
/ERMIA E. MELIKA/Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ANNA M MOMPER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619