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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 9/10/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the annular side wall has an adjustable axial extension of Claim 10, and the welding torch of claim 16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “14” has been used to designate both “the lower circumferential groove” and “straight segments of the driving belts”. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “50” has been used to designate both “the upper lid wall” and “wire straightening group”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 2’. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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) 1-2, 4-5, 10-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lombardi, Foreign Patent Document, WO20181676806 in view of Hoover, US20230294955.
Regarding independent claim 1, Lombardi discloses a storage and feeding assembly for a wire to be fed to an apparatus (100, 2, 4, Fig. 1), comprising: a drum suitable for storing the wire wound in coils (2 for storing wire 1' wound in coils, Fig. 1), the drum extending about a drum axis (axis of 2, Fig. 2) between a resting base (60, Fig. 2) and an open upper end (top of 2, Fig. 1, 2); a wire handling device positioned between the drum and the apparatus and suitable for extracting the wire from the drum to feed the wire to the apparatus (Fig. 1, Paragraph [0020]); a lid placed above the drum (4, Fig. 1), wherein an outlet passage for the wire is provided in a top of the lid (2', Fig. 1).
Lombardi does not disclose wherein the storage and feeding assembly further comprises a spacer suitable for being releasably positioned between the upper end of the drum and the lid, and wherein said spacer comprises a spacer body defining a spacer housing delimited by an annular side wall so as to act as an extension for the drum.
However, Hoover teaches a storage and feeding assembly for filamentary material, further comprising a spacer (25, 30, Fig. 2) suitable for being releasably positioned between the upper end of the drum(15A, Fig. 2) and the lid (49, Fig. 2), wherein said spacer comprises a spacer body defining a spacer housing delimited by an annular side wall so as to act as an extension for the drum (30 has annular side wall acting as an extension for the drum, Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add a spacer as taught by Hoover to the wire storage and feeding assembly of Lombardi, to ensure space for the wire to properly uncoil. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a spacer on top of the drum as taught by Hoover, since it has been held that constructing formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. Further, adding a spacer is simply a mechanism for adjusting the longitudinal height of the drum along the drum axis, and thus it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the spacer as taught by Hoover, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
Regarding claim 2, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 1, and a storage and feeding assembly.
Lombardi does not disclose wherein the spacer body comprises an upper base connected to the annular side wall.
However, Hoover teaches a storage and feeding assembly for filamentary material, wherein the spacer body comprises an upper base (44, Fig. 3) connected to the annular side wall (44 connected to 25, Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the storage and feeding assembly of Lombardi to have the upper base connected to the annular side wall in order to support the wire handling device. One would have been motivated to make this modification to ensure the wire handling device is centered and supported inside the lid of the drum.
Regarding claim 4, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 1, and wherein the wire handling device (100, Fig. 1) is positioned downstream of the lid (4, Fig. 1) along a feeding direction of the wire to the apparatus (100 is downstream of 4, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above and further comprising at least one wire unwinding accessory (3, Fig. 1) positioned at least partially in the housing (2, 4, Fig. 1).
Lombardi does not disclose a spacer.
However, Hoover teaches a storage and feeding assembly for filamentary material, further comprising a spacer (25, 30, Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add a spacer as taught by Hoover to the wire storage and feeding assembly of Lombardi, to ensure space for the wire to properly uncoil. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a spacer on top of the drum as taught by Hoover, since it has been held that constructing formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. Further, adding a spacer is simply a mechanism for adjusting the longitudinal height of the drum along the drum axis, and thus it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the spacer as taught by Hoover, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
Regarding claim 10, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 1, and an annular side wall.
Lombardi does not disclose the annular side wall has an adjustable axial extension.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the annular side wall adjustable, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954). One would have been motivated to make this modification to accommodate a variety of drums, wire packages, and straightening/pulling mechanisms to ensure adequate space for uncoiling of the wire.
Regarding claim 11, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 10, and wherein the annular side wall of the lid is a telescopic wall (4, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 1, and wherein the wire handling device comprises a wire straightening group and/or a wire pulling group (100, Fig. 1 comprises straightening group 50, and pulling group 10, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 12 and the wire straightening group (50, Fig. 3) comprises at least two roller straightening units placed in series with each other along a feeding direction of the wire (Paragraph [0037]).
Regarding claim 14, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 12, and wherein the wire pulling group (10, Fig. 2a) comprises two opposed driving belts (12, 12', Fig. 3a) forming two respective straight belt segments facing each other to receive therebetween and move the wire (14, 14', Fig. 3a) exiting from the drum (2, Fig. 2; Paragraph [0026]).
Regarding independent claim 15, Lombardi discloses a storage and feeding assembly for a welding wire for a welding or brazing system (Paragraph [0019]), comprising: a drum in which the welding wire wound in coils is stored (2 for storing wire 1' wound in coils, Fig. 1), the drum extending about a drum axis (axis of 2, Fig. 2) between a resting base (60, Fig. 2) and an open upper end (top of 2, Fig. 1, 2); a wire handling device positioned between the drum and the apparatus and suitable for extracting the wire from the drum to feed the wire to the apparatus (Fig. 1, Paragraph [0020]); a lid placed above the drum (4, Fig. 1) and comprising a top (4, Fig. 1) in which an outlet passage for the welding wire is provided (2', Fig. 1) wherein a ratio between a longitudinal dimension of the drum and a longitudinal dimension of the bundle ranges between 70% and 100% (Ratio between 1’ and 2 is between 70% and 100%, Fig. 1).
Lombardi does not disclose a spacer suitable for being releasably positioned between the upper end of the drum and the lid so as to act as an extension for the drum.
However, Hoover teaches a storage and feeding assembly for filamentary material having a spacer (25, 30, Fig. 2) suitable for being releasably positioned between the upper end of the drum(15A, Fig. 2) and the lid (49, Fig. 2), so as to act as an extension for the drum (30 has annular side wall acting as an extension for the drum, Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add a spacer as taught by Hoover to the wire storage and feeding assembly of Lombardi, to ensure space for the wire to properly uncoil. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a spacer on top of the drum as taught by Hoover, since it has been held that constructing formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. Further, adding a spacer is simply a mechanism for adjusting the longitudinal height of the drum along the drum axis, and thus it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the spacer as taught by Hoover, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
Regarding claim 16, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 1, and wherein the wire is a welding wire to be fed to a welding torch (Paragraph [0002], lines 2-4).
Regarding claim 17, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 15, and a ratio between the longitudinal dimension of the drum and the longitudinal dimension of the bundle (height of 1’ to height of 2, Fig. 1).
Lombardi does not disclose the ratio is 85%.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a ratio of 85%, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. One would have been motivated to make this modification to ensure adequate space for unwinding of coils while also maximizing the amount of wire held in each drum.
Claim(s) 3, 7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lombardi, Foreign Patent Document, WO20181676806 and Hoover, US20230294955 as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Pan, Foreign Patent Document, CN115283793.
Regarding claim 3, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 2, and a wire handling device.
Lombardi does not disclose wherein the wire handling device is integrally fixed to the upper base, and wherein the lid defines a lid volume in which the wire handling device extends substantially coaxially to the drum axis.
Pan teaches a device for storing and feeding wire, wherein the wire handling device (251, 252, Fig. 5) is integrally fixed to the upper base (244, Fig. 6), wherein the lid defines a lid volume (volume contained beneath 110, Figs. 1-3), in which the wire handling device extends substantially coaxially to the drum axis (II shows 251, 252 extends coaxial to drum axis and located within lid volume, Fig. 5, 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Lombardi to have the wire handling device fixed, and a lid covering the wire handling device as taught by Pan, in order to cover the wire handling device and drum and avoid contamination by dust or debris (Paragraph [0040], lines 4-5; Pan).
Regarding claim 7, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 1, and a storage and feeding assembly.
Lombardi does not disclose wherein at least one spacer opening for accessing the spacer housing is provided in the annular side wall of the spacer.
However, Hoover teaches a storage and feeding assembly for filamentary material, further comprising a spacer (25, 30, Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add a spacer as taught by Hoover to the wire storage and feeding assembly of Lombardi, to ensure space for the wire to properly uncoil. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a spacer on top of the drum as taught by Hoover, since it has been held that constructing formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. Further, adding a spacer is simply a mechanism for adjusting the longitudinal height of the drum along the drum axis, and thus it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the spacer as taught by Hoover, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
Further, Pan teaches an opening for accessing the housing is provided in the annular side wall (140 in 110, Figs. 1 and 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the opening of Pan with the spacer of Hoover on the device of Lombardi to “facilitate observation of the wire feeding status” within the spacer volume (Paragraph [0040], lines 4-5).
Regarding claim 9, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 3, and wherein the lid comprises a lid side wall (4, Fig. 1).
Lombardi does not disclose at least one lid opening for accessing the lid volume is provided in the lid side wall.
However, Pan teaches a device for storage and feeding of welding wire, wherein the lid comprises a lid side wall (110, Fig. 2) and wherein at least one lid opening (140, Fig. 1) for accessing the lid volume (operator can access the lid volume via 140, Fig. 1) is provided in the lid side wall (110, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the lid of Lombardi to have the opening as taught by Pan, “to facilitate observation of the wire feeding status” (Paragraph [0040], lines 4-5).
Claim(s) 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lombardi, Foreign Patent Document, WO20181676806 and Hoover, US20230294955as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bae, Foreign Patent Document, KR100463375.
Regarding claim 6, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 1, and the storage and feeding assembly.
Lombardi does not disclose further comprising first coupling means for releasably fastening the spacer to the drum, wherein said first coupling means comprise a first releasable clamping ring that couples adjacent end portions of the drum and of the annular side wall.
Hoover teaches a storage and feeding device for filamentary material, further comprising first coupling means for releasably fastening the spacer to the drum (26, Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Lombardi to have a first coupling means as taught by Hoover to ensure the spacer is secured to the drum during operation.
Bae teaches a storage device for wire having coupling means, wherein said first coupling means comprise a first releasable clamping ring (160, Fig. 2b) that couples adjacent end portions of the drum and of the annular side wall (couples drum and annular side wall, Fig. 2b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the coupling means of Hoover to have the releasable clamping ring as taught by Bae, so that the components can be "easily joined and disassembled" (Paragraph [27], lines 3-4; Bae).
Regarding claim 8, modified Lombardi teaches the invention substantially as claimed as described above in claim 1, and the storage and feeding assembly.
Lombardi does not disclose further comprising second coupling means for releasably fastening the lid to the spacer, wherein said second coupling means comprise a second releasable clamping ring that couples adjacent end portions of the annular side wall and of the lid.
Hoover teaches a device for storage and feeding of filamentary material, further comprising second coupling means (45, Fig. 3) for releasably fastening the lid to the spacer (releasably fastens lid, 42, 44, 31, 35, Fig. 3 to spacer, 25, Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Lombardi to have a second coupling means as taught by Hoover to ensure the lid is secured to the spacer during operation.
Bae teaches a device for storing wire, wherein said second coupling means comprise a second releasable clamping ring (160, Fig. 2b) that couples adjacent end portions of the annular side wall and of the lid (couples drum and annular side wall, Fig. 2b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the coupling means of Hoover to have the releasable clamping ring as taught by Bae, so that the components can be "easily joined and disassembled" (Paragraph [27], lines 3-4; Bae).
Double Patenting
Claims 1-9, 12-14, and 16 of this application is patentably indistinct from claims 1-13 of Application No. 18828256. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.78(f), when two or more applications filed by the same applicant or assignee contain patentably indistinct claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their retention during pendency in more than one application. Applicant is required to either cancel the patentably indistinct claims from all but one application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-9, 12-14, and 16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-13 of copending Application No. 18828256 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the differences amount to minor-rewording of claim limitations. Therefore, the claims of Application No. 18828256 encompass the instant claims and render the instant claims unpatentable under anticipatory obvious type double patenting.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATELYNNE BURRELL whose telephone number is (703)756-1344. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00am - 6:00pm EST.
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 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.
/K.R.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/WADE MILES/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights