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 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: in step D, the phrase “the inner semiconducting layers” should be singular not plural: “the inner semiconducting layer”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2019/0305499 ("Gustafsson") in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0068802 ("Doedens").
Regarding claim 1, Gustafsson discloses a method of performing a quality inspection of a vulcanized joint of a power cable during manufacturing of the vulcanized joint, the method comprising:
a) obtaining, from [an ultrasonic sensor] (56, Fig. 6), measurements of an outer surface of an inner semiconducting layer (outer surface of 52, Fig. 6) provided over a conductor joint (see joint between two conductors 10, Fig. 6 and see region CZ, Fig. 3) which joints conductors (10, Fig. 6) of two power cable sections (Fig. 6), and of a transition area between the outer surface (outer surface of 52, Fig. 6) and outer surfaces of a respective inner semiconducting layer (outer surface of 12, Fig. 6 of each cable) of the two power cable sections (Fig. 6, see paragraph [0072] and see measurement points in Fig. 6 include the transition between 52 and 12, Fig. 6),
b) obtaining, from [an ultrasonic sensor] (56, Fig. 6), measurements of an outer surface of a tapering section (50, Fig. 6) of an insulation layer (14, Fig. 6) arranged around a respective one of the inner semiconducting layers (12, Fig. 6) of the two cable sections (10, Fig. 6, and see measurement points in Fig. 6, paragraph [0073]),
c) processing the measurements obtained in step a) and in step b), the processing involving generating one or a respective 3D model of the outer surfaces (paragraphs [0075], [0077]) and evaluating an outer surface quality of the outer surfaces based on the one or more 3D models (paragraphs [0076]-[0077]),
d) presenting a conclusion regarding surface quality based on the evaluation (paragraph [0078]),
and placing an outer joint insulation (58, Fig. 8).
Gustafsson does not disclose a laser scanner for obtaining measurements, nor obtaining measurements of an outer surface of a joint insulation arranged around the inner semiconducting layer and then processing that measurement to determine a thickness or outer diameter of the joint insulation, nor steps g1/g2 are taught.
However, Doedens discloses a laser scanner for obtaining measurements (40, Fig. 1, paragraph [0060]), and obtaining measurements of an outer surface (5, Fig. 2 is the outer surface of insulation 4, Fig. 2) of a [area of interest] (paragraphs [0061], [0074], Figs. 2-3) arranged around the inner semiconducting layer (3, Fig. 2, paragraph [0071]) and then processing (42/43, Fig. 1) that measurement to determine a thickness or outer diameter of the joint insulation (paragraph [0066]-[0068], height, height variation threshold, and size, and see Fig. 3, implicitly determines thickness and/or outer diameter), and presenting the insulation thickness or outer diameter (see Fig. 3), and/or, evaluating the insulation thickness or outer diameter (paragraph [0077], see 504, Fig. 4), and presenting a conclusion regarding the insultation thickness or outer diameter based on the comparison (506, Fig. 4, paragraph [0077]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a laser scanner for obtaining measurements of all the layers of the joint conductor as disclosed by Doedens in the device of Gustafsson in order to ensure that all layers meet quality standards.
Regarding claim 2, Gustafsson in view of Doedens discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, and Doesden further discloses that step f) involves generating a 3D model of the outer surface of the [joint insulation] (paragraph [0020]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to generate a 3D model of the outer surface of an area of interest as disclosed by Doesdens such as the joint insulation of Gustafsson in order to detect dimensional defects on the outer surface.
Regarding claim 3, Gustafsson in view of Doedens discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, and Gustafsson further discloses that the evaluating in step c) involves assessing roundness and surface texture of the outer surfaces (paragraph [0076], shape, protusions, holes).
Regarding claim 4, Gustafsson in view of Doedens discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, and Doesden further discloses that the evaluating involves comparing each 3D model with a respective reference 3D model (paragraphs [0026], [0042]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to compare the measurements to a 3D model as disclosed by Doesdens such as the joint insulation of Gustafsson in order to ensure it meets the desired quality/standard.
Regarding claim 5, Gustafsson in view of Doedens discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, and Doesden further discloses that the evaluating involves comparing the insulation thickness or the outer diameter with a reference (implied, see paragraph [0042], a 3D drawing of the area of interest is the reference).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to compare the measurements to a reference as disclosed by Doesdens such as the joint insulation of Gustafsson in order to ensure it meets the desired quality/standard.
Regarding claim 6, Gustafsson in view of Doedens discloses the method as claimed in claim 5, and Doesden further discloses the reference is a 3D model of the joint insulation (implied, see paragraph [0042], a 3D drawing of the area of interest is the reference).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to compare the measurements to a reference 3D model as disclosed by Doesdens such as the joint insulation of Gustafsson in order to ensure it meets the desired quality/standard.
Regarding claim 7, Gustafsson in view of Doedens discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, and Doesden further discloses the laser scanner (40, Fig. 1) is a 3D laser scanner (paragraph [0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a 3D laser scanner as disclosed by Doesdens in the device of Gustafsson in order to allow for a creating 3D map of all interfaces within the entire cable part and/or assembly.
Regarding claim 8, Gustafsson discloses a quality inspection system comprising:
processing circuitry (paragraph [0099]),
[an ultrasonic sensor] (56, Fig. 6)configured to send measurements to the processing circuitry (implied, paragraph [0100]), and
a storage medium comprising having computer code which when executed by the processing circuitry causes the quality inspection system to carry out the method of performing a quality inspection of a vulcanized joint of a power cable during manufacturing of the vulcanized joint (paragraphs [0099]-[0101]), the method including:
a) obtaining, from [an ultrasonic sensor] (56, Fig. 6), measurements of an outer surface of an inner semiconducting layer (outer surface of 52, Fig. 6) provided over a conductor joint (see joint between two conductors 10, Fig. 6 and see region CZ, Fig. 3) which joints conductors (10, Fig. 6) of two power cable sections (Fig. 6), and of a transition area between the outer surface (outer surface of 52, Fig. 6) and outer surfaces of a respective inner semiconducting layer (outer surface of 12, Fig. 6 of each cable) of the two power cable sections (Fig. 6, see paragraph [0072] and see measurement points in Fig. 6 include the transition between 52 and 12, Fig. 6),
b) obtaining, from [an ultrasonic sensor] (56, Fig. 6), measurements of an outer surface of a tapering section (50, Fig. 6) of an insulation layer (14, Fig. 6) arranged around a respective one of the inner semiconducting layers (12, Fig. 6) of the two cable sections (10, Fig. 6, and see measurement points in Fig. 6, paragraph [0073]),
c) processing the measurements obtained in step a) and in step b), the processing involving generating one or a respective 3D model of the outer surfaces (paragraphs [0075], [0077]) and evaluating an outer surface quality of the outer surfaces based on the one or more 3D models (paragraphs [0076]-[0077]),
d) presenting a conclusion regarding surface quality based on the evaluation (paragraph [0078]),
and placing an outer joint insulation (58, Fig. 8).
Gustafsson does not disclose a laser scanner for obtaining measurements, nor obtaining measurements of an outer surface of a joint insulation arranged around the inner semiconducting layer and then processing that measurement to determine a thickness or outer diameter of the joint insulation, nor steps g1/g2 are taught.
However, Doedens discloses a laser scanner for obtaining measurements (40, Fig. 1, paragraph [0060]), and obtaining measurements of an outer surface (5, Fig. 2 is the outer surface of insulation 4, Fig. 2) of a [area of interest] (paragraphs [0061], [0074], Figs. 2-3) arranged around the inner semiconducting layer (3, Fig. 2, paragraph [0071]) and then processing (42/43, Fig. 1) that measurement to determine a thickness or outer diameter of the joint insulation (paragraph [0066]-[0068], height, height variation threshold, and size, and see Fig. 3, implicitly determines thickness and/or outer diameter), and presenting the insulation thickness or outer diameter (see Fig. 3), and/or, evaluating the insulation thickness or outer diameter (paragraph [0077], see 504, Fig. 4), and presenting a conclusion regarding the insultation thickness or outer diameter based on the comparison (506, Fig. 4, paragraph [0077]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a laser scanner for obtaining measurements of all the layers of the joint conductor as disclosed by Doedens in the device of Gustafsson in order to ensure that all layers meet quality standards.
Regarding claim 10, Gustafsson in view of Doedens discloses the method as claimed in claim 2, and Gustafsson further discloses that the evaluating in step c) involves assessing roundness and surface texture of the outer surfaces (paragraph [0076], shape, protusions, holes).
Regarding claim 11, Gustafsson in view of Doedens discloses the method as claimed in claim 2, and Doesden further discloses that the evaluating involves comparing each 3D model with a respective reference 3D model (paragraphs [0026], [0042]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to compare the measurements to a 3D model as disclosed by Doesdens such as the joint insulation of Gustafsson in order to ensure it meets the desired quality/standard.
Regarding claim 12, Gustafsson in view of Doedens discloses the method as claimed in claim 2, and Doesden further discloses that the evaluating involves comparing the insulation thickness or the outer diameter with a reference (implied, see paragraph [0042], a 3D drawing of the area of interest is the reference).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to compare the measurements to a reference as disclosed by Doesdens such as the joint insulation of Gustafsson in order to ensure it meets the desired quality/standard.
Regarding claim 13, Gustafsson in view of Doedens discloses the method as claimed in claim 2, and Doesden further discloses the laser scanner (40, Fig. 1) is a 3D laser scanner (paragraph [0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a 3D laser scanner as disclosed by Doesdens in the device of Gustafsson in order to allow for a creating 3D map of all interfaces within the entire cable part and/or assembly.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gustafsson in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0411939 ("Doedens ‘939").
Regarding claim 9, Gustafsson discloses a method of making a vulcanized joint of a power cable utilising the quality inspection system of claim 8, the method comprising:
A) making a conductor joint (see area CZ, Fig. 3) between two conductor ends of respective power cable lengths (10, Fig. 3, paragraph [0065]), to form a single power cable with two power cable sections separated by the conductor joint (CZ, Fig. 3, paragraph [0067]),
B) making a respective insulation layer (50, Figs. 4-8) of the two power cable sections tapering (paragraph [0068]),
C) providing an inner semiconducting layer (52, Figs. 3-8) around the conductor joint (10, Figs. 3-8), the inner semiconducting layer (52, Figs. 3-8) contacting respective inner semiconducting layers (12, Figs. 3-8) of the power cable sections (see Figs. 3-8),
D) making a quality inspection of the outer surface of the inner semiconducting layers (outer surface of 52, Figs. 3-8) and of the tapering outer surfaces of the insulation layers (50, Figs. 3-8) of the two power cable sections using the quality inspection system (1), wherein if the outcome of the quality inspection is a fail (paragraph [0087]-[0088]), the method comprises includes:
E) mechanically processing the outer surface(s) of the inner semiconducting layer(s) and/or the tapering outer surfaces (for example, removing material, paragraph [0090]), wherein if the outcome of the quality inspection is a pass, the method comprises includes:
F) making a joint insulation (58, Fig. 8) over the inner semiconducting layer (52, Fig. 8) provided around the conductor joint (10, Fig. 8), the joint insulation (58, Fig. 8) contacting the tapering outer surfaces (see Fig. 8).
Gustafsson does not disclose a laser scanner for obtaining measurements, nor making a quality inspection of the joint insulation to determine a thickness or outer diameter of the joint insulation, nor repeating steps until the quality inspection is a pass.
However, Doedens ‘939 discloses a laser scanner for obtaining measurements (40, Fig. 1, paragraph [0060]), and making a quality inspection of the [area of interest] (paragraph [0047]-[0048]) using the quality inspection system (1) to determine an outer diameter or insulation thickness of the [area of interest] (paragraph [0045], shape is determined with 3D laser scanner see paragraph [0021]), wherein if the outcome of the quality inspection in step G) is a fail (paragraph [0049]), the method comprises includes:
H) mechanically processing the outer surface of the joint insulation (paragraph [0049], removing a section), and repeating steps G) and H) until the outcome of the quality inspection in step G) is a pass (see Fig. 3, 5, paragraphs [0049]-[0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to repeat the quality inspection for every layer after corrections as disclosed by Doedens ‘393 in the device of Gustafsson in order to ensure quality of the final product.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA T. TABA whose telephone number is (571)272-1583. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 6 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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/MONICA T TABA/Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights