DETAILED ACTION
This is a first action on the merits of application 18874123.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 13 and 19 is 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.
The term “meandering” in claims 13 and 19 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “meandering” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Examiner can’t identify or quantify what is a meandering path.
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) 1-6, 10-13, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a as being anticipated by TOMINAGA US 20150329180.
Claim 1, Tominaga discloses a floating foundation [4/3/1 encompassing] for an offshore wind turbine [fig. 1] having a tower [4] defining a vertical direction, the floating foundation comprising at least a first vertical section [3], a final vertical section [3], and an intermediate vertical section [3] and at least two horizontal sections [23], wherein the vertical sections and the horizontal sections are tubular members [figs. 1-4], arranged in an alternating manner, and connected together by interpenetrating tube joints [fig. 4 wherein 23 intersect 3 at the joint] and wherein one of the vertical sections [3] is arranged to receive the tower [4]. See [0060-0064]
Claim 2, Tominaga discloses wherein the intermediate vertical section [3] is arranged to receive the tower [4]. See fig. 1
Claim 3, Tominaga discloses wherein the horizontal sections [23] comprise at least one underwater section and at least one above-water section. See fig. 10A top half section above waterline bottom section is submerged.
Claim 4, Tominaga discloses wherein the horizontal sections [23] are of a constant first diameter and the vertical sections [3] are all of a constant second diameter and the first diameter of the horizontal sections is smaller than the second diameter of the vertical sections. See figs 2-4
Claim 5, Tominaga discloses wherein the vertical sections [3] are equally spaced and form nodes of an equilateral triangle in a horizontal plane. See fig. 1 and 3.
Claim 6, Tominaga discloses wherein for each interpenetrating tube joint an end of the horizontal section [23] passes completely through the vertical section [3] and is welded both at an entry side and at an exit side. See fig. 4a/b [0066]
Claim 10, Tominaga discloses wherein the final vertical [3] section is arranged to terminate underwater [fig. 10b/11] and is provided with a heave plate. [0072] when made of steel it has a thin steel heave plate to prevent buckling.
Claim 11, Tominaga discloses wherein an interior of the floating foundation is hollow and comprises a plurality of separated ballast tanks. See [0063, 0088-0089] fig. 9
Claim 12, Tominaga discloses wherein the floating foundation is made of steel [0062] and configured to support a wind turbine [fig. 1] with a total weight of more than 1000 t [0076].
Claim 13, Tominaga discloses as best understood wherein the tubular members [23] are arranged in an alternating manner to define a meandering path extending from a proximal end to a distal end with the first vertical section [3] located at the proximal end, the intermediate vertical section located in between a horizontal underwater section and a horizontal above-water section and the final vertical section located at the distal end of the floating foundation. See fig. 12.
Claim 18, Tominaga discloses a floating wind turbine [fig. 1] having a tower [4] and a floating foundation, the floating foundation comprising at least a first vertical section [3], a final vertical section [3], an intermediate vertical section [3] and at least two horizontal sections [23], wherein the vertical sections and the horizontal sections are tubular members, arranged in an alternating manner, and connected together by interpenetrating tube joints and wherein the tower [4] extends from one of the vertical sections. See figs. 1-4 and 12 [0060-0064]
Claim 19, Tominaga discloses as best understood wherein the tubular members [23] are arranged in an alternating manner to define a meandering path extending from a proximal end to a distal end with the first vertical section [3] located at the proximal end, the intermediate vertical section located in between a horizontal underwater section and a horizontal above-water section and the final vertical section located at the distal end of the floating foundation. See fig. 12.
Claim 20, Tominaga discloses wherein the tower [4] extends from the intermediate vertical section [3]. See fig. 1
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) 7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TOMINAGA US 20150329180.
Claim 7, Tominaga discloses the aforementioned limitations of claim 1, he does not disclose the foundation comprises exactly three vertical members and exactly two horizontal members. He however discloses three vertical members and 3 horizontal members in fig. 1. It has been held that duplication or quantity of parts is of ordinary skill in the art. Thus, it 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 to have the above said configuration based on a design choice to decrease cost by having one less horizontal member.
Claim 9, Tominaga discloses the aforementioned limitations of claim 1, he does not disclose wherein each section of the floating foundation has a circular external cross-section with a diameter in a range between 7.5 m and 15 m. It has been held that finding an optimal range is of ordinary skill in the art. While from the drawings there is range seen but not disclosed, it 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 to use said range based on design choice to meet load parameters of the desired tower size.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TOMINAGA US
20150329180 and in further view of LUSTHOF WO 2023098994.
Claim 8, Tominaga discloses the aforementioned limitations of claim 1, he does not disclose wherein each section of the floating foundation further comprises a plurality of ring frames attached to an inner surface and extending radially inwardly. Lusthof discloses a foundation that uses ring frames [46] fig. 5 in a wind turbine foundation. Thus, it 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 to have modified Tominaga with Lusthof to increase turbine stability when the tower is placed in the foundation vertical column member.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-17 are allowed. Prior art does not disclose the method steps.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOVON E HAYES whose telephone number is (571)272-3115. The examiner can normally be reached 10am-6pm M-F.
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, MARC JIMENEZ can be reached at 571-272-4530. 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.
/JOVON E HAYES/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights