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 § 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 1-4 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the suspension cable" in line 7 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 3, 5, 7, 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (JP 736991992, herein known as JP1992, herein referenced by the English Machine Translation).
Re Claim 1, JP1992 discloses a pump installation apparatus 1 for installing a submersible pump 5 in a pump column 4 and removing the submersible pump 5 from the pump column 4, the submersible pump 5 being used to deliver liquefied gas, the pump installation apparatus 1 comprising: a working chamber 8; an actuator-driven door covering 7 an upper opening of the pump column 4; and a crane 11-13 configured to transport a suspension cable 6, an upper opening of the pump column 4, the actuator-driven door 7, and the crane 11-13 being disposed in the working chamber 8 (Par. “Example”, Figs. 1 and 2).
Re Claim 3, JP1992 discloses the working chamber 8 includes a purge-gas inlet port 15 communicating with the working chamber 8, and a purge-gas supply line coupled to the purge-gas inlet port (Par. “Example”, Figs. 1 and 2).
Re Claim 5, JP1992 discloses a method of installing a submersible pump 5 in a pump column 4, the submersible pump 5 being used to deliver liquefied gas, the method comprising: opening an actuator-driven door 7 disposed within a working chamber 8, the actuator-driven door 7 being coupled to an upper portion of the pump column 4; and lowering the submersible pump 5 in the pump column 4 by a crane 11-13 disposed in the working chamber 8, an upper opening of the pump column 4 being located in the working chamber 8 (Par. “Example”, Figs. 1 and 2).
Re Claim 7, JP1992 discloses supplying a purge gas N2 into the working chamber 8 before the submersible pump 5 is carried into the pump column 4 to expose the submersible pump 5 to the purge gas N2 within the working chamber 8 (Par. “Example”, Figs. 1 and 2).
Re Claim 9, JP1992 discloses a method of removing a submersible pump 5 from a pump column 4, the submersible pump 5 being used to deliver liquefied gas, the method comprising: opening an actuator-driven door 7 located in a working chamber 8, the actuator-driven door 7 being coupled to an upper portion of the pump column 4; raising the submersible pump 5 in the pump column 4 by pulling up the submersible pump with a crane 11-13, the crane being disposed in the working chamber 8; and raising the submersible pump 5 from the pump column 4 into the working chamber 8 by the crane 11-13, an upper opening of the pump column 4 being located in the working chamber 8 (Par. “Example”, Figs. 1 and 2).
Re Claim 11, JP1992 discloses supplying a purge gas N2 into the working chamber 8 after raising the submersible pump 5 from the pump column 4 into the working chamber 8 to expose the submersible pump 5 to the purge gas N2 within the working space 8 (Par. “Example”, Figs. 1 and 2).
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) 4 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP 736991992).
Re Claim 4, JP1992 discloses a first electrical contact (not labeled, the Examiner construes the first electrical contact to be a first end of an electrical wire 17, secured to the pump 5) electrically coupled to an electric motor of the submersible pump 5; a second electrical contact (not labeled, the Examiner construes the second electrical contact to be a second end of an electrical wire 17, secured to the work area) fixed to the work area 8 and in contact with the first electrical contact; and a power cable (not labeled, the cable attached to the second end of the electrical wire 17 on the exterior of the working area 8) electrically coupled to the second electrical contact (Par. “Example”, Figs. 1 and 2). Although JP1992 does not explicitly disclose the second electrical contact is fixed to the pump column, the Examiner construes the configuration of JP1992 to be equivalent to the claimed configuration as supply electrical power to the submersible pump. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize either electrical contact configuration as both supply electrical power to the submersible pump.
Re Claim 8, JP1992 discloses bringing a first electrical contact (not labeled, the Examiner construes the first electrical contact to be a first end of an electrical wire 17, secured to the pump 5), which is electrically coupled to an electric motor of the submersible pump 5, into contact with a second electrical contact (not labeled, the Examiner construes the second electrical contact to be a second end of an electrical wire 17, secured to the work area) fixed to the work area 8 when the submersible pump 5 is lowered in the pump column 4 (Par. “Example”, Figs. 1 and 2). Although JP1992 does not explicitly disclose the second electrical contact is fixed to the pump column, the Examiner construes the configuration of JP1992 to be equivalent to the claimed configuration as supply electrical power to the submersible pump. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize either electrical contact configuration as both supply electrical power to the submersible pump.
Claim(s) 2, 6 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP 736991992), in view of Haesloop et al. (US 4435132).
Re Claim 2, JP1992 discloses a suspension cable 6 configured to suspend the submersible pump 5 in the pump column 4 (Par. “Example”, Figs. 1 and 2).
JP1992 does not explicitly disclose the suspension cable comprises a plurality of split suspension cables and a plurality of coupling links configured to couple the plurality of split suspension cables, and the pump installation apparatus further comprises a link operating device configured to operate the plurality of coupling links to cause the plurality of coupling links to couple and separate the plurality of split suspension cables.
Haesloop discloses a pump installation apparatus for installing a submersible pump 26 in a pump column 14 and removing the submersible pump 26 from the pump column 14, the submersible pump 26 being used to deliver liquefied gas R, the pump installation apparatus comprising: a crane 69 configured to transport a suspension cable 36; the suspension cable 36 comprises a plurality of split suspension cables 40 (Col. 4; Lines 51-53, Fig. 1) and a plurality of coupling links 110 configured to couple the plurality of split suspension cables 40 (Figure 3 shows at least four coupling links 110, securing a sealing member 74, which links the multiple split cables 40), and the pump installation apparatus further comprises a link operating device (not shown, it is obvious that the operating device is a fastening/unfastening tool, as the coupling links are screws) configured to operate the plurality of coupling links to cause the plurality of coupling links to couple and separate the plurality of split suspension cables (Col. 5, Lines 33-62, Figs. 1-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of JP1992 by providing a plurality of split suspension cables and a plurality of coupling links configured to couple the plurality of split suspension cables, as disclosed by Haesloop, for the benefit of providing electrical power to the submersible pump and support and lifting/lowering the submersible pump.
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 10 and 12 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAYAN SALONE whose telephone number is (571)270-7739. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-60 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, Sunil Singh can be reached at (571)272-3460. 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.
/BAYAN SALONE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726