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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of group I, specie 1A, 2A, 3A (as confirmed in a telephone interview on 8/11/2026), claims 1-3, 7-10, 12, in the reply filed on 7/22/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious burden. This is not found persuasive because there is no serious burden. The Examiner disagrees. The method and apparatus are in two different classes. The apparatus does not require the method limitations. They would require two different searches.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim 2-3, 8 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 2 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “simultaneously advancing the first tubular shoulder and the second tubular shoulder from the initial position and into the respective first and second surface of the weld object along the respective first and second head axis, while retracting the first and second probe members from the initial position the along the respective first and second head axis”. Claim 1 states “simultaneously advancing one of the first probe member and the first tubular shoulder, and one of the second probe member and the second tubular shoulder, from an initial position and into the respective first and second surface of the weld object along the respective first and second head axis, while retracting the other of the first probe member and the first tubular shoulder and the second probe member and the second tubular shoulder from an initial position and along the respective first and second head axis”. Is Claim 2 further limiting claim 1 or is this a separate advancing step separate from claim 1? The Examiner requests that the Applicant please clarify. For the purpose of examination, it is further limiting claim 1.
Claim 8 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “advancing the first probe member and the second probe member from the initial position and into the respective first and second surface of the weld object along the respective first and second head axis, while retracting the first tubular shoulder and the second tubular shoulder from the initial position along the respective first and second head axis”. Claim 1 states “simultaneously advancing one of the first probe member and the first tubular shoulder, and one of the second probe member and the second tubular shoulder, from an initial position and into the respective first and second surface of the weld object along the respective first and second head axis, while retracting the other of the first probe member and the first tubular shoulder and the second probe member and the second tubular shoulder from an initial position and along the respective first and second head axis”. Is Claim 8 further limiting claim 1 or is this a separate advancing step separate from claim 1? The Examiner requests that the Applicant please clarify. For the purpose of examination, it is further limiting claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 7, 9-10, 12 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: prior art was not found that taught or suggested the method as claimed that included providing a second welding head comprising a second probe member and a second tubular shoulder, the second probe member being located inside and axially aligned with the second tubular shoulder along a second head axis; locating the first welding head on a first surface of a weld object to be welded such that the first probe member and the first tubular shoulder are in contact with the first surface; locating the second welding head on a second surface of the weld object, opposing the first surface, such that the second probe member and the second tubular shoulder are in contact with the second surface and the first head axis is aligned with the second head axis; simultaneously rotating the first welding head and the second welding head so as to form a volume of increased plasticity in the weld object proximate the first and second welding heads; simultaneously advancing one of the first probe member and the first tubular shoulder, and one of the second probe member and the second tubular shoulder, from an initial position and into the respective first and second surface of the weld object along the respective first and second head axis, while retracting the other of the first probe member and the first tubular shoulder and the second probe member and the second tubular shoulder from an initial position and along the respective first and second head axis; returning each of the first and second probe member and first and second tubular shoulder towards the initial position; and removing the first and second welding head from the respective first and second surface of the weld object.
Claims 2, 3, and 8 would be indicated allowable if the 112 (b) rejection is overcome.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN B SAAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3634. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-6p.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/ERIN B SAAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights