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
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 4 is believed to depend on claim 3, as otherwise it lacks antecedent basis. The claim has been interpreted as depending on claim 3 for the purposes of examination. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2014/0126695 (STOCK).
Regarding claim 1, STOCK disclose a system comprising:
a frame (30) adapted to be detachably coupled to one or more powerlines [0023], wherein the frame comprising at least one X-ray unit (20) configured to capture one or more X-ray images of the one or more powerlines [0023];
processing circuitry that is coupled to the at least one X-ray unit ([0026], imager 24 captures x-rays... and creates a digital image), and configured to:
process the one or more X-ray images by way of a picture archiving & communication system (PACS) and an assistive defect recognition (ADR) technique to determine one or more abnormalities associated with the one or more powerlines ([0026]-[0028]); and
generate a report based on the one or more abnormalities by way of the picture archiving & communication system (PACS) ([0026], creates digital images representative of the state of cabling and/or couplers and any defect that may exist therein).
Regarding claim 5, STOCK in view of Gordon disclose the system of claim 2, wherein the user device is further configured to receive the report ([0026]-[0028]).
Regarding claim 6, STOCK disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more abnormalities comprising one of, broken spring fragments, detached core sleeves, spiral fractures, implosive splice fracture, cracks, voids, missing grease, or air pockets ([0005], [0026]).
Regarding claim 7, STOCK disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one X-ray unit comprising at least one X-ray generator that is configured to (i) generate a plurality of X-rays and (ii) transmit the plurality of X-rays to the one or more power lines (22).
Regarding claim 9, STOCK disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the frame further comprising (i) an insulation portion that is adapted to be coupled to the at least one X-ray generator and (ii) a metal frame portion that is adapted to be coupled to the at least one digital detector (Fig. 5).
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) 2 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STOCK as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2007/0257197 (Gordon).
Regarding claim 2, STOCK disclose the system of claim 1, further comprising a user device (26) that is coupled to the at least one X-ray unit and the processing circuitry [0027], and configured to receive the one or more X-ray images and transmit the one or more X-ray images to the processing circuitry ([0028], wireless communication unit 28 provides for communication between the system 10 and a remote computer to transmit digital NDT images).
However, STOCK fails to explicitly teach configured to transmit the one or more X-ray images to the processing circuitry in a Digital Imaging And Communication In Non-Destructive Evaluation (DICONDE) format.
Gordon disclose a user interface configured to save image data from an x-ray detector in DICONDE format and transmit the formatted image data for use in non-destructive testing (NDT) application (see claims 8 and 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of STOCK with the teachings of Gordon. One would have been motivated to make such a modification to save and transmit image date in DICONDE format on the basis of standardization, interoperability, and industry compliance.
Regarding claim 8, STOCK disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one X-ray unit further comprising at least one digital detector that is configured to (i) capture the plurality of X-rays passed through the one or more power lines and (ii) generate the one or more X-ray images (24).
STOCK is silent with respect to the format, thereby allowing for that which is known in the art.
Gordon disclose a user interface configured to save image data from an x-ray detector in DICONDE format and transmit the formatted image data for use in non-destructive testing (NDT) application (see claims 8 and 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of STOCK with the teachings of Gordon. One would have been motivated to make such a modification to save and transmit image date in DICONDE format on the basis of standardization, interoperability, and industry compliance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 4 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3, STOCK disclose the system of claim 1, but fails to teach the details of further comprising one or more Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) that is adapted to be detachably coupled to the frame, and configured to aviate the frame to reach a vicinity of the one or more powerlines and detachably couple the frame to the one or more powerlines.
Claim 4 depends on claim 3.
Claims 10-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 10, the best prior art, US 2014/0126695 (STOCK), disclose a system comprising:
a frame (30) adapted to be detachably coupled to one or more powerlines [0023], wherein the frame comprising at least one X-ray unit (20) configured to capture one or more X-ray images of the one or more powerlines [0023];
processing circuitry that is coupled to the at least one X-ray unit ([0026], imager 24 captures x-rays... and creates a digital image), and configured to:
(i) process the one or more X-ray images by way of a picture archiving & communication system (PACS) and an assistive defect recognition (ADR) technique to determine one or more abnormalities associated with the one or more powerlines ([0026]-[0028]); and
(ii) generate a report based on the one or more abnormalities by way of the picture archiving & communication system (PACS) ([0026], creates digital images representative of the state of cabling and/or couplers and any defect that may exist therein).
However, the prior art of record fails to teach the details of one or more unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that is adapted to be detachably coupled to the frame, and configured to aviate the frame to reach a vicinity of the one or more powerlines and detachably couple the frame to the one or more powerlines. Since the prior art of record fails to teach the details above, nor is there any reason to modify or combine prior art elements absent applicant’s disclosure, the claim is deemed patentable over the prior art of record.
Claim 18 is allowed for the reasons above, mutatis mutandis.
Claims 2-17 and 19-20 are allowed by virtue of their dependence.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANI FOX whose telephone number is (571)272-3513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5.
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 Makiya can be reached at 571-272-2273. 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.
/DANI FOX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884