Detailed Action
Status of Claims
This is the first office action on the merits. Claims 1-21 are currently pending and addressed below.
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 (IDS) submitted on 12/16/2024 has being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "54" and "53" have both been used to designate what appears to be the “articulation piston”. 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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, each articulation piston having a part spherical surface adapted 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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “articulated coupling” 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The articulated coupling was not described in the specification or drawings in a way easily conveyed by one skilled in the relevant art. The instant specification mentions an articulated coupling in [0010] describing the articulated coupling in broad generic terms, however, the drawings and specification only provide further description of what the Examiner assumes is the articulated coupling in Fig 14 as element 55 and a blown up representation of Element 55 in Fig 15-16 and paragraphs [0052]-[0055]. However the specification labels element 55 of Fig 14 as the “articulated joint” and therefore it is unclear if the articulated coupling is different or the same as the articulated joint. Examiner assumes for the purpose of examination that the articulated coupling is the articulated joint.
Claims 1 & 16 are rejected on this basis.
Claims 2-15 & 17-21 are rejected for depending on a rejected claim.
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.
Claim 1-21 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.
Claims 1-21 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
The claim(s) are replete with indefinite language and while Examiner has attempted to disclose all known issues in the claims, further claim language issues may be present in the instant application. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited.
Examiner has attempted to examine the application as best understood in the claims, specification and drawings, however, further issues and interpretations may arise on amendment that were not anticipated by the Examiner.
Claims 2-15:
Claims 2-15 recites the limitation "a drill head" in line 1. Antecedent basis was established in the preamble of claim 1. The claim preambles should state “The drill head according to claim …”
Claims 17-21:
Claims 17-21 recites the limitation "a micro tunneling" in line 1. Antecedent basis was established in the preamble of claim 16. The claim preambles should state “The micro tunneling apparatus according to claim…”
Claims 1, 14-15:
The metes and bounds of claims 1 & 14-15 are unclear as the claims introduce an alterative name for various structures, such as hydraulic rams (hereafter articulation rams), the claim language is ambiguous as it is referring to a single part with two separate names. Examiner suggests amending the language to remove the alternative name, such as hydraulic articulation rams to help with the clarity of the claim language.
Claim 1:
The metes and bounds of claim 1 are unclear as it is ambiguous what is considered the “distal end of the housing” as the claim language does not define if the distal end is the uphole end or downhole end or on either end away from the center point of the housing for determining if a radial member is adjacent to the distal end.
The metes and bounds of the claim language “move in a longitudinally of the annular body” is phrased in such way that is unclear and open to interpretation as to the meaning. For examination purposes examiner assumes the pistons are to move longitudinally along the annular body.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the articulated coupling" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Furthermore, the metes and bounds are unclear if “the articulated coupling” is the same structure as the “the articulated joint” or if they are two different structures. Therefore, it is not clear in the claim language whether or not the articulated coupling and articulated joint are the same structure or different structures recited in further dependent claims.
Claim 16:
As written the claim language of claim 16 cite: “a drill head according to claim 1” bringing all the limitations of claim 1 into claim 16. Therefore, Claim 16 suffers from the same 35 USC §112b issues as disclosed above in claim 1.
Claims 1 & 16 are rejected on this basis.
Claims 2-15 & 17-21 are rejected for depending on a rejected claim.
Claim 4:
The metes and bounds of Claim 4 are unclear as the limitation recites “an articulated coupling” while claim 1 has an antecedent basis issue for "the articulated coupling" in line 11. Furthermore, it is unclear if this is a new articulated coupling, an attempt to introduce the articulated coupling from claim 1 as an independent structure, or if is the same structure as the articulated joint from claim 1 as described above regarding the interchangeability of “coupling vs joint”.
Claim 15:
The metes and bounds of claim 15 are unclear as it includes “drill head according to claim 16 wherein the housing has at least one spray outlet (hereafter housing spray) adapted for spraying fluid towards the cutter bar.” Referencing a future claim and repeating the claim limitations of claim 14 which claim 15 depends from.
Claim 18:
The metes and bounds of claim 18 are unclear as the antecedent basis for “a latch connection” was established in claim 17 from which 18 depends from. It is unclear if this is a new latch connection or further disclosing the latch connection from claim 17.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Peters (US Pub No 20180016845).
Peters discloses in claim 1. A drill head for use with a microtunneling apparatus to produce a bore including a housing (Peters Fig 2b; 246) having an annular shell (Peters Fig 2b; 246 and 258 are hollow) and a radial member adjacent a distal end of the housing (Peters Fig 2b; 258), a cutter bar (Peters Fig 2b; 255) having at least one cutting element positioned for front cutting (Peters Fig 2b; 255 is positioned in the front of the drill string to cut), the cutter bar is rotatable across the radial member within a working zone of the bore to produce swarf (Peters [0016] the drill bit is rotated by rotating the flexible transmission shaft and that in turn rotates the drill bit drive shaft), the housing including an annular body housing an articulated joint (Peters Fig 2b; 274) and a plurality of radially mounted actuators (Peters Fig 2b; 280a-c) positioned about the articulated joint that are operable for adjusting an angle of articulation of the articulated joint (Peters Fig 2b; 280a-c is disposed around the drive and joint); wherein the actuators are hydraulic rams (hereafter articulation rams) (Peters Fig 2b 281a-c hydraulic chambers) each including a piston (hereafter articulation piston) (Peters Fig 2b 276a-c hydraulic pistons valves) which is arranged to move in a longitudinally of the annular body (Peters Fig 2b; 276a-c [0020] actuator piston moves longitudinally along the annular body to allow fluid flow), each articulation piston having a part spherical surface adapted to interact with a socket so as to allow the articulation piston to move axially while permitting angular adjustment of the articulated coupling (Peters Fig 2b 276a-c have spherical heads).
Peters discloses in claim 4. A drill head according to claim 1 including an input shaft (Peters Fig 2b; 245) at a proximal end of the annular body that is rotatable about a drive axis, an output shaft (Peters Fig 2b; 247) extending towards the distal end of the annular shell associated with the cutter bar so that the cutter bar rotates about an output axis (Peters [0016] the drill bit is rotated by rotating the flexible transmission shaft and that in turn rotates the drill bit drive shaft), an articulated coupling (Peters Fig 2b; 274) within the housing between the input shaft and the output shaft that is adjustable so as to adjust an angle of articulation between the input shaft and the output shaft.
Peters discloses in claim 14. A drill head according to claim 1 wherein the cutter bar having at least one spray outlet (hereafter bar spray) adapted for spraying fluid towards the radial member (Peters Fig 2b; 255a).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peters (US Pub No 20180016845) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Winslow (US Pub No 20150083496).
Peters discloses in claim 2. A drill head according to claim 1 wherein the articulated coupling includes a drive gear shaft (Peters Fig 2b; 245 flexible transmission shaft), a driven gear shaft (Peters Fig 2b; 247)
Peters discloses a jointed shaft configuration (Peters Fig 2b; 245 and 247 are connected) within the articulated coupling but does not disclose further details on the coupling between the drive gear shaft and driven gear shaft.
However, Winslow discloses: a drive gear shaft (Winslow 262), a driven gear shaft (Winslow 239) and geared sleeve (Winslow 260) which are adapted to allow for adjustment of the articulated coupling (Winslow [0017] planetary gear box assembly can be installed in a steerable tool head across an articulated joint and adapt to movement steerable tool head).
As both Peters and Winslow both disclose a gear shaft, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the flexible transmission shaft of Peters for the geared flexible drive shaft of Winslow to achieve the predictable result, with a reasonable expectation of success of transmitting torque to a tool head through an articulated joint.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peters (US Pub No 20180016845) & Winslow (US Pub No 20150083496) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Wan (US Pub No 20240263519).
Peters in view of Wan disclose in claim 3. A drill head according to claim 2 wherein the drive gear shaft and driven gear shaft each include gear teeth (Winslow Fig 2b; 230 and 237) that are crescent shaped that are adapted to interact with the geared sleeve so to achieve up to 3o of adjustment of the angle of articulation.
With respect to claim 3, Peters et al. discloses that the Steerable drive shaft, but is silent as to the angle of articulation. Wan teaches that the angle of articulation can vary for a variety of purposes including enable better steering of the downhole tool (Wan [0004] [0006] [0048]). As shown in Wan, the angle of articulation is disclosed to be a result effective variable in that changing the angle of articulation effects the ability steer the tool. Further, it appears one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying Peters et al. to have an angle of articulation within the claimed range, as it involves only adjusting the dimension of a component disclosed to require adjustment. Therefore, it would have been to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Peters et al. by making the angle of articulation as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not invention to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claim(s) 1, 5, 14-15, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrison (US Pub No 20140219725) in view of Peter (US Pub No 20120018225)
Harrison discloses in claim 1. A drill head for use with a microtunneling apparatus to produce a bore including a housing (Harrison Fig 4; 86) having an annular shell (Harrison Fig 4; cross section of tool shows 86 as a shell) and a radial member adjacent a distal end of the housing, a cutter bar (Harrison Fig 4; 34) having at least one cutting element positioned for front cutting (Harrison [0033] element 34 is defined as a cutting unit), the cutter bar is rotatable across the radial member within a working zone of the bore to produce swarf (Harrison [0033] element 34 is defined as a rotating cutting unit of a drill head), the housing including an annular body housing an articulated joint (Harrison Fig 19; 310 and Fig 21; 310 [0074] universal joint formed allows for pivotable joint to direct the cutter bar) and a plurality of radially mounted actuators (Harrison [0053] pistons extended and retracted by fluid pressure from modules 109a-d) positioned about the articulated joint that are operable for adjusting an angle of articulation of the articulated joint (Harrison Fig 19 & 21 [0075] pivot structure is capable of being selectively pivoted (Actuators) about the pivot structure); wherein the actuators are hydraulic rams (hereafter articulation rams) (Harrison Fig 22; 326) each including a piston (hereafter articulation piston) (Harrison Fig 22; 118a) which is arranged to move in a radially of the annular body (Harrison Fig 19 & 21 118a [0075] pivot structure is capable of being selectively pivoted (Actuators) about the pivot structure via a plurality of radial pistons), each articulation piston having a part spherical surface adapted to interact with a socket so as to allow the articulation piston to move axially while permitting angular adjustment of the articulated coupling (Harrison Fig 19, 21, 22 [0076] Pistons have a multiple piece configuration including universal joints between the feet and the main bodies of the piston to allow for the required movement of the articulated joint).
Harrison discloses that the pistons and rams of the actuator are capable of moving radially with the body, Harrisons actuators do not however, extend longitudinally along the body.
However, Peter discloses an actuator system (Peter Fig 2; 300) that moves in a longitudinal direction along the body.
As both Harrison and Peter both disclose an actuator system with pistons for deflecting a drill bit, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the radial piston of Harrison for the Longitudinal Piston of Peter to achieve, with a reasonable expectation of success, the predictable result of deflecting the drill bit.
Harrison in view of Peter discloses in claim 5. A drill head according to claim 1 including an air cavity (Harrison [0044] tunneling apparatus includes a vacuum system) extending longitudinally of the housing leading to an air aperture in the radial member for supplying air to the working zone (Harrison [0044] tunneling apparatus includes a vacuum system which is directly behind the cutting unit and applies vacuum pressure to the remove spoils and liquid from around the drill bit), the radial member having at an exhaust aperture leading to an exhaust cavity extending longitudinally of the housing for extracting swarf from the working zone, the air cavity, the working zone and the exhaust cavity defining an air flow path (Harrison [0044] tunneling apparatus includes a vacuum system which is directly behind the cutting unit and applies vacuum pressure to the remove spoils and liquid from around the drill bit as well as extending the length of the drill string into back to the pit), a pressure adjustment mechanism (Harrison [0044] air supplied to the distal end of drill string) operable at the distal end of the housing for adjusting air pressure in the working zone so as to adjust the extraction of swarf from the working zone (Harrison [0044] air is provided a the distal end of the drill string through air passages to assist the vacuum passages in preventing plugging of the vacuum passages).
Harrison in view of Peter discloses in claim 14. A drill head according to claim 1 wherein the cutter bar having at least one spray outlet (hereafter bar spray) adapted for spraying fluid towards the radial member (Peters Fig 2b; 255a).
Harrison in view of Peter discloses in claim 15. A drill head according to claim 14 including an air cavity (Harrison [0044] tunneling apparatus includes a vacuum system) extending longitudinally of the housing leading to an air aperture in the radial member for supplying air to the working zone (Harrison [0044] tunneling apparatus includes a vacuum system which is directly behind the cutting unit and applies vacuum pressure to the remove spoils and liquid from around the drill bit), the radial member having at an exhaust aperture leading to an exhaust cavity extending longitudinally of the housing for removing swarf from the working zone (Harrison [0044] tunneling apparatus includes a vacuum system which is directly behind the cutting unit and applies vacuum pressure to the remove spoils and liquid from around the drill bit as well as extending the length of the drill string into back to the pit), the housing having at least one spray outlet (Harrison [0043] cutting head has a plurality of fluid delivery ports such that fluid is readily provided at the cutting face) (hereafter exhaust spray) adapted for spraying fluid towards the exhaust aperture (Harrison [0043] cutting head has a plurality of fluid delivery ports such that fluid is readily provided at the cutting face).
Harrison discloses in claim 16. A microtunneling apparatus for producing a bore including a drive apparatus (Harrison Fig 1; 32) for location in a pit (Harrison Fig 1 showing a borehole being drilled within a pit), a drill string (Harrison Fig 1; 22 drill string) for connection to the drive apparatus (Harrison [0034] drive apparatus configured to connect to a drill string and apply torque and longitudinal movement), the drill string having a drive shaft that is rotatable on operation of the drive apparatus (Harrison [0034] drive apparatus configured to connect to a drill string and apply torque and longitudinal movement), a drill head according to claim 1 ( From claim 1 above: 1. A drill head for use with a microtunneling apparatus to produce a bore including a housing (Harrison Fig 4; 86) having an annular shell (Harrison Fig 4; cross section of tool shows 86 as a shell) and a radial member adjacent a distal end of the housing, a cutter bar (Harrison Fig 4; 34) having at least one cutting element positioned for front cutting (Harrison [0033] element 34 is defined as a cutting unit), the cutter bar is rotatable across the radial member within a working zone of the bore to produce swarf (Harrison [0033] element 34 is defined as a rotating cutting unit of a drill head), the housing including an annular body housing an articulated joint (Harrison Fig 19; 310 and Fig 21; 310 [0074] universal joint formed allows for pivotable joint to direct the cutter bar) and a plurality of radially mounted actuators (Harrison [0053] pistons extended and retracted by fluid pressure from modules 109a-d) positioned about the articulated joint that are operable for adjusting an angle of articulation of the articulated joint (Harrison Fig 19 & 21 [0075] pivot structure is capable of being selectively pivoted (Actuators) about the pivot structure); wherein the actuators are hydraulic rams (hereafter articulation rams) (Harrison Fig 22; 326) each including a piston (hereafter articulation piston) (Harrison Fig 22; 118a) which is arranged to move in a radially of the annular body (Harrison Fig 19 & 21 118a [0075] pivot structure is capable of being selectively pivoted (Actuators) about the pivot structure via a plurality of radial pistons), each articulation piston having a part spherical surface adapted to interact with a socket so as to allow the articulation piston to move axially while permitting angular adjustment of the articulated coupling (Harrison Fig 19, 21, 22 [0076] Pistons have a multiple piece configuration including universal joints between the feet and the main bodies of the piston to allow for the required movement of the articulated joint).
Harrison discloses that the pistons and rams of the actuator are capable of moving radially with the body, Harrisons actuators do not however, extend longitudinally along the body.
However, Peter discloses an actuator system (Peter Fig 2; 300) that moves in a longitudinal direction along the body.
As both Harrison and Peter both disclose an actuator system with pistons for deflecting a drill bit, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the radial piston of Harrison for the Longitudinal Piston of Peter to achieve, with a reasonable expectation of success, the predictable result of deflecting the drill bit.) for connection to the drill string such that rotation of the drive shaft results in rotation of the cutter bar (Harrison [0034] rotation of the drive unit drives the drill head and cutter bar). )
Claim(s) 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrison (US Pub No 20140219725) & Peter (US Pub No 20120018225) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Shuman (US Pub No 20110266062).
Harrison in view of Peter discloses in claim 17. A microtunneling apparatus according to claim 16 including a pair of elongate members located at proximal end of the housing (Harrison Fig 2; 76 contains two elongate members)
However, Harrison in view of Peter does not disclose the means of making and breaking up connection between pipe sections. However,
Shuman teaches the means for making and breaking up connections of drill pipe by: interacting with a latch connection (Shuman Fig 6; 202 [0051] male connection is held in place via latches) at a distal end the drill string each elongate member is adapted to be adjustable so as to vary the tolerance between proximal end of the housing and the distal end of the drill string (Shuman [0053] latches allow for movement to vary the tolerance between the housing ends).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Harrison in view of Peter to include latches as taught by Shuman for the purpose of connecting drill pipe sections via latches.
Harrison et al disclose in claim 18. A microtunneling apparatus according to claim 17 wherein the drill string being formed by a plurality of connected string segments each string segment including a latch connection for manually connecting adjacent string segments (Shuman Fig 6; 202 [0051] male connection is held in place via latches).
Harrison et al disclose in claim 19. A microtunneling apparatus according to claim 18 wherein the drill string includes a first cavity (Harrison [0044] tunneling apparatus includes a vacuum system with a first cavity to supply air from the drive apparatus to the working zone) adapted for supplying air from the drive apparatus to the working zone (Harrison [0044] tunneling apparatus includes a vacuum system with a first cavity to supply air from the drive apparatus to the working zone) and a second cavity for extracting swarf from the working zone to the drive apparatus (Harrison [0044] tunneling apparatus includes a vacuum system with a second cavity to facilitate the return of slurry).
Harrison et al disclose in claim 20. A microtunneling apparatus according to claim 19 wherein the first cavity is also adapted for sighting a laser there along to a rear surface of the radial member (Harrison Fig 1; 40 laser 42 laser beam to 44).
Harrison et al disclose in claim 21. A microtunneling apparatus according to claim 20 wherein the drill string includes a channel extending longitudinally thereof to accommodate cabling extending between the drive apparatus and the drill head so as to allow for operation of the drill head by an operator remote from the working zone (Harrison [0040] data cables run the length of the passage and the length of the drill string from the drill head to the drive unit), including at least adjustment of the radially mounted actuators remote from the annular body (Harrison [0040] data cables run the length of the passage and the length of the drill string from the drill head to the drive unit for remote control and steering of the drill head)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 6:
Steerable tunneling tools are well known in the art of wellbore exploration and operations. Representative art which appears close to the claimed invention includes Harrison (US Pub No 20100206635). This art, alone or in combination, discloses various structures related to a multi channel tool string that applies a vacuum system to inject air into the end of the wellbore and return slurry via channel in the drill string utilizing various recited features including but not limited to, such as an air pressure source (Fig 13; 360), a first channel (Fig 13; 43), a return channel (Fig 13; 47) regulating and maintaining air pressure to ensure a steady flow to the tool face and return of a slurry back towards the pit for removal of spoils and maintaining the system without clogging the pathways. However, this art fails to disclose or fairly suggest the specifically combined structure and steps regarding the specific positional relationships and operations between each recited structure in operation, such as a throat member that is positioned between the air aperture and the extraction aperture to create a venturi flow therebetween, the throat member is adjustable to control venturi flow of air in the working zone. It could be argued that the individual structure is generally known or easily conceived in the art and thus, could just be assembled to disclose the claimed invention. However, the instant invention clearly and specifically recites structural relationships and combinations, which require a greater effort than just cobbling together known structures. Furthermore, the claimed structures are sufficiently detailed to be distinguishable when configured as claimed. The examiner could find no motivation to combine or modify the references which would define a fully functioning apparatus as claimed in the instant application.
Claims 7-9 are dependent from claim 6 and are indicated as allowable for being dependent on claim 6.
Claim 10:
Claim 10 is indicated as allowable as the best prior art for the claims as written, Harrison US Pub No 20140219725, teaches all the prior limitations of independent claim 1 but Harrison does not teach a movable imaging device that is capable of moving between a retracted position within the housing and an extended position external to the housing and modification of Harrison to include the limitations of claim 10 would rely on hindsight reasoning to modify to meet the limitations of claim 10 as written. Therefore, the limitations of claim 10 if included with the limitations of claim 1 as written overcome would be considered allowable subject matter.
Claims 11-13 are dependent from claim 6 and are indicated as allowable for being dependent on claim 10.
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 Nicholas D Wlodarski whose telephone number is (571)272-3970. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Nicole Coy can be reached at (571) 272-5405. 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.
/NICHOLAS D WLODARSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3672
/Nicole Coy/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3672