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 .
Claims 1-13 are present for examination.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3, 10, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 2, “the steps” should be “steps”.
Claim 3, line 2, “the at least one” should be “at least one”.
Claim 10, line 2, “Wherein” should be “wherein”.
Claim 13, line 4, “scanner (38)” should be “scanner”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-13 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.
Regarding claim 1, it recites, inter alia, “…b) capturing and storing an initial set of 3-dimensional (3D) surface geometry measurement data of an outer surface of the initial layer by moving a 3D surface scanner about the initial layer, … d) capturing and storing a subsequent set of 3-dimensional (3D) surface geometry measurement data of an outer surface of the subsequent layer by moving the 3D surface scanner about the subsequent layer, e) merging the 3D surface geometry measurement data of the subsequent layer with previous 3D surface geometry measurement data by transforming the captured 3D surface geometry measurement data of the layers into a common reference coordinate system to form a merged 3D model of the layers, … and h) repeating steps c) to g) until the factory joint is completed.”
It is not clear what data “previous 3D surface geometry measurement data” is referring to. According to claim 1, it has an initial set of 3-dimensional (3D) surface geometry measurement data captured in step b), and a subsequent set of 3-dimensional (3D) surface geometry measurement data captured in step d). The step e) merges the 3D surface geometry measurement data of the subsequent layer with previous 3D surface geometry measurement data. And the claim further recites a step h) which repeats steps c) to g), which means step d) will be repeated to capture at least another subsequent set of 3-dimensional (3D) surface geometry measurement data. This will make the “initial set of 3D surface geometry measurement data” and the first “subsequent set of 3D surface geometry measurement data” both “previous 3D surface geometry measurement data” when the step d) is performed as steps c) to g) are repeated. It is not clear which 3D surface geometry measurement data will be merged with the newly captured (in step d)) the 3D surface geometry measurement data of the subsequent layer in step e). Therefore, claim 1 is indefinite.
Claims 2-12 depend from claim 1 but fail to cure the deficiencies of claim 1.
Therefore, claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 USC 112(b) for being indefinite. For examination purposes, the “previous 3D surface geometry measurement data” has been interpreted as all the 3D surface geometry measurement data of the previous layers.
Regarding claim 13, it recites “the 3D surface geometry measurement device” in line 8 and “the layer” in line 9. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Therefore, claim 13 is rejected under 35 USC 112(b) for being indefinite. For examination purposes, “the 3D surface geometry measurement device” has been interpreted as the 3D surface scanner, and “the layer” has been interpreted as any surface layer.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 13 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,560,426 B2 in view of European Patent Publication No. EP3901571 A1 to Doedens.
18/977952 Claim 13
12,560,426 Claim 8
A system for inspecting a factory joint during installation, the system comprising:
A system for inspecting surfaces and/or interfaces of high voltage and/or medium voltage cable components, the system comprising:
a 3D surface scanner, and
a non-contact surface scanner, for capturing at least one set of 3D surface geometry measurement data of an area of interest of a surface of the cable component by moving the non-contact surface scanner over the area of interest, a fixture for arranging around the surface to be scanned for capturing the 3D surface geometry measurement data, said fixture comprising a plurality of positioning markers, a memory unit for storing multiple 3D surface geometry measurement data of the area of interest,
a processing unit couplable with the 3D surface scanner (38),
a processor connected to the non-contact surface scanner,
wherein the processing unit is configured to receive 3D surface geometry measurement data from the 3D surface scanner, and wherein the processing unit is configured to inspect 3D surface geometry measurement data captured by the 3D surface geometry measurement device to determine shape parameters and/or surface texture parameters of the layer, and
configured to inspect the captured 3D surface geometry measurement data to determine smoothness of the surface scanned by the surface scanner, and
to compare the determined shape parameters with expected shape parameters, and/or to compare the determined surface texture parameters with expected surface texture parameters, and
compare the smoothness with threshold data to provide a quality report for the surface scanned by the surface scanner.
to output a deviation signal if the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters and/or if the determined surface texture parameters deviate by more than a predetermined surface texture tolerance from the expected surface texture parameters.
The smoothness of the surface recited in claim 8 of 12,560,426 can correspond to shape parameters recited in claim 13 of 18/977,951, and the threshold data recited in claim 8 of 12,560,426 can correspond to a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters recited in claim 13 of 18/977,951.
However, claim 8 of 12,560,426 does not expressly disclose to output a deviation signal if the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters and/or if the determined surface texture parameters deviate by more than a predetermined surface texture tolerance from the expected surface texture parameters. On the other hand, Doedens discloses to output a deviation signal if the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters and/or if the determined surface texture parameters deviate by more than a predetermined surface texture tolerance from the expected surface texture parameters (Doedens, para. [0030], disclosing an analysis part in communication with the non-contact surface scanner, the analysis part comprises a processor adapted to process measurement data from the non-contact surface scanner to create a continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface and comparing the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement with at least one surface geometry acceptance threshold determining the quality of the surface of the high voltage end, para. [0031], disclosing the surface geometry acceptance threshold may be based on a height variation threshold, surface derivative threshold, peeling wave threshold, and/or an area of a cut, a depth of a curt, and a slope of a cut, and an operator may receive a go or a no go after the scan is performed, allowing or disallowing the operator to proceed mount a HV cable accessory, indicating the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface can correspond to the height variation, surface derivative, peeling wave, area of a cut, depth of a cut, and/or slope of a cut as the shape parameters determined to be compared with the corresponding threshold, and the no go output can correspond to a deviation signal corresponding to the comparison result of the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters based on the corresponding threshold).
It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art to combine claim 8 of 12,560,426 with Doedens. The suggestion/motivation would have been to determine a quality of a surface of a high voltage cable end, as suggested by Doedens (see Doedens, Abstract).
Claim 13 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 12 of copending Application No. 19/414,357 in view of Doedens.
18/977952 Claim 13
19/414,357 Claim 12
A system for inspecting a factory joint during installation, the system comprising:
A system for inspecting surfaces and/or interfaces of high voltage and/or medium voltage cable components, the system comprising:
a 3D surface scanner, and
a non-contact surface scanner (40), for capturing at least one set of 3D surface geometry measurement data of an area of interest (45) of the cable component by moving the non-contact surface scanner over the area of interest, wherein the non-contact surface scanner comprises 3D markers, an external camera connected to the non-contact surface scanner, wherein the non-contact surface scanner uses the external camera and the 3D markers to obtain the scanner position in relation to the cable,
a memory unit (44) for storing multiple 3D surface geometry measurement data of the area of interest,
a processing unit couplable with the 3D surface scanner (38),
a processor (43) connected to the non-contact surface scanner,
wherein the processing unit is configured to receive 3D surface geometry measurement data from the 3D surface scanner, and wherein the processing unit is configured to inspect 3D surface geometry measurement data captured by the 3D surface geometry measurement device to determine shape parameters and/or surface texture parameters of the layer, and
configured to inspect the captured 3D surface geometry measurement data to determine smoothness of the surface scanned by the surface scanner, and
to compare the determined shape parameters with expected shape parameters, and/or to compare the determined surface texture parameters with expected surface texture parameters, and
compare the smoothness with threshold data to provide a quality report for the surface scanned by the surface scanner.
to output a deviation signal if the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters and/or if the determined surface texture parameters deviate by more than a predetermined surface texture tolerance from the expected surface texture parameters.
The smoothness of the surface recited in claim 12 of 19/414,357 can correspond to shape parameters recited in claim 13 of 18/977,951, and the threshold data recited in claim 12 of 19/414,357 can correspond to a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters recited in claim 13 of 18/977,951.
However, claim 12 of 19/414,357 does not expressly disclose to output a deviation signal if the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters and/or if the determined surface texture parameters deviate by more than a predetermined surface texture tolerance from the expected surface texture parameters. On the other hand, Doedens discloses to output a deviation signal if the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters and/or if the determined surface texture parameters deviate by more than a predetermined surface texture tolerance from the expected surface texture parameters (Doedens, para. [0030], disclosing an analysis part in communication with the non-contact surface scanner, the analysis part comprises a processor adapted to process measurement data from the non-contact surface scanner to create a continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface and comparing the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement with at least one surface geometry acceptance threshold determining the quality of the surface of the high voltage end, para. [0031], disclosing the surface geometry acceptance threshold may be based on a height variation threshold, surface derivative threshold, peeling wave threshold, and/or an area of a cut, a depth of a curt, and a slope of a cut, and an operator may receive a go or a no go after the scan is performed, allowing or disallowing the operator to proceed mount a HV cable accessory, indicating the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface can correspond to the height variation, surface derivative, peeling wave, area of a cut, depth of a cut, and/or slope of a cut as the shape parameters determined to be compared with the corresponding threshold, and the no go output can correspond to a deviation signal corresponding to the comparison result of the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters based on the corresponding threshold).
It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art to combine claim 12 of 19/414,357 with Doedens. The suggestion/motivation would have been to determine a quality of a surface of a high voltage cable end, as suggested by Doedens (see Doedens, Abstract).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
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) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Doedens.
Regarding claim 13, Doedens discloses A system for inspecting a factory joint during installation, the system comprising:
a 3D surface scanner (Doedens, para. [0029], disclosing a non-contact surface scanner, which may be a 3D laser scanner), and
a processing unit couplable with the 3D surface scanner (38) (Doedens, para. [0030], disclosing an analysis part in communication with the non-contact surface scanner, the analysis part comprises a processor), wherein the processing unit is configured to receive 3D surface geometry measurement data from the 3D surface scanner (Doedens, para. [0030], disclosing an analysis part in communication with the non-contact surface scanner, the analysis part comprises a processor adapted to process measurement data from the non-contact surface scanner to create a continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface and comparing the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement with at least one surface geometry acceptance threshold determining the quality of the surface of the high voltage end), and wherein the processing unit is configured to inspect 3D surface geometry measurement data captured by the 3D surface geometry measurement device to determine shape parameters and/or surface texture parameters of the layer (Doedens, para. [0030], disclosing an analysis part in communication with the non-contact surface scanner, the analysis part comprises a processor adapted to process measurement data from the non-contact surface scanner to create a continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface and comparing the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement with at least one surface geometry acceptance threshold determining the quality of the surface of the high voltage end, claim 3, disclosing the surface geometry acceptance threshold is a surface derivative threshold, indicating the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface can correspond to the surface derivative as the shape parameters determined to be compared with the corresponding threshold), and to compare the determined shape parameters with expected shape parameters, and/or to compare the determined surface texture parameters with expected surface texture parameters (Doedens, para. [0030], disclosing an analysis part in communication with the non-contact surface scanner, the analysis part comprises a processor adapted to process measurement data from the non-contact surface scanner to create a continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface and comparing the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement with at least one surface geometry acceptance threshold determining the quality of the surface of the high voltage end, para. [0031], disclosing the surface geometry acceptance threshold may be based on a height variation threshold, surface derivative threshold, peeling wave threshold, and/or an area of a cut, a depth of a curt, and a slope of a cut, indicating the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface can correspond to the height variation, surface derivative, peeling wave, area of a cut, depth of a cut, and/or slope of a cut as the shape parameters determined to be compared with the corresponding threshold), and to output a deviation signal if the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters and/or if the determined surface texture parameters deviate by more than a predetermined surface texture tolerance from the expected surface texture parameters (Doedens, para. [0030], disclosing an analysis part in communication with the non-contact surface scanner, the analysis part comprises a processor adapted to process measurement data from the non-contact surface scanner to create a continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface and comparing the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement with at least one surface geometry acceptance threshold determining the quality of the surface of the high voltage end, para. [0031], disclosing the surface geometry acceptance threshold may be based on a height variation threshold, surface derivative threshold, peeling wave threshold, and/or an area of a cut, a depth of a curt, and a slope of a cut, and an operator may receive a go or a no go after the scan is performed, allowing or disallowing the operator to proceed mount a HV cable accessory, indicating the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface can correspond to the height variation, surface derivative, peeling wave, area of a cut, depth of a cut, and/or slope of a cut as the shape parameters determined to be compared with the corresponding threshold, and the no go output can correspond to a deviation signal corresponding to the comparison result of the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters based on the corresponding threshold).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, the closest prior art references the examiner have found are US Patent Publication No. 20250389674 A1 to Gustafsson et al. and Doedens, which disclose A method for manufacturing and inspecting a factory joint during installation (Gustafsson, Abstract), the method comprising the steps of: a) preparing an initial layer of the factory joint (Gustafsson, para. [0037], disclosing an inner semiconducting layer is arranged over the conductor joint), b) capturing and storing an initial set of 3-dimensional (3D) surface geometry measurement data of an outer surface of the initial layer by moving a 3D surface scanner about the initial layer (Gustafsson, para. [0039], disclosing a quality inspection of the outer surface of the inner semiconductor layers, the laser scanner is moved over and scans the outer surface of the inner semiconducting layer and the transition areas), c) preparing a subsequent layer of the factory joint (Gustafsson, para. [0041], disclosing the laser scanner is moved over the tapering section of each of the insulation layers), d) capturing and storing a subsequent set of 3-dimensional (3D) surface geometry measurement data of an outer surface of the subsequent layer by moving the 3D surface scanner about the subsequent layer (Gustafsson, para. [0041], disclosing the laser scanner is moved over the tapering section of each of the insulation layers, and scanning the outer surface of the tapering sections, para. [0042], disclosing obtaining the measurements of the outer surface of the tapering sections, from the laser scanner), e) merging the 3D surface geometry measurement data of the subsequent layer with previous 3D surface geometry measurement data to form a merged 3D model of the layers (Gustafsson, para. [0043], disclosing the measurements obtained in step a) and step b) are processed by the processing unit, para. [0044], disclosing the processing involving generating a single or a respective 3-d model of the outer surfaces and evaluating the outer surface quality of the outer surfaces based on the one or more 3-d models, a single 3-d model may be generated, modeling al the scanned outer surfaces), f) analyzing the merged 3D model to determine shape parameters and/or surface texture parameters of the subsequent layer (Doedens, para. [0030], disclosing an analysis part in communication with the non-contact surface scanner, the analysis part comprises a processor adapted to process measurement data from the non-contact surface scanner to create a continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface and comparing the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement with at least one surface geometry acceptance threshold determining the quality of the surface of the high voltage end, claim 3, disclosing the surface geometry acceptance threshold is a surface derivative threshold), g) comparing the determined shape parameters with expected shape parameters, and/or comparing the determined surface texture parameters with expected surface texture parameters (Doedens, para. [0030], disclosing an analysis part in communication with the non-contact surface scanner, the analysis part comprises a processor adapted to process measurement data from the non-contact surface scanner to create a continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface and comparing the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement with at least one surface geometry acceptance threshold determining the quality of the surface of the high voltage end, para. [0031], disclosing the surface geometry acceptance threshold may be based on a height variation threshold, surface derivative threshold, peeling wave threshold, and/or an area of a cut, a depth of a curt, and a slope of a cut), and if the determined shape parameters deviate by more than a predetermined shape tolerance from the expected shape parameters and/or if the determined surface texture parameters deviate by more than a predetermined surface texture tolerance from the expected surface texture parameters outputting a deviation signal Doedens, para. [0030], disclosing an analysis part in communication with the non-contact surface scanner, the analysis part comprises a processor adapted to process measurement data from the non-contact surface scanner to create a continuous 3D surface geometry measurement of the surface and comparing the continuous 3D surface geometry measurement with at least one surface geometry acceptance threshold determining the quality of the surface of the high voltage end, para. [0031], disclosing the surface geometry acceptance threshold may be based on a height variation threshold, surface derivative threshold, peeling wave threshold, and/or an area of a cut, a depth of a curt, and a slope of a cut, and an operator may receive a go or a no go after the scan is performed, allowing or disallowing the operator to proceed mount a HV cable accessory).
However, none of the prior art references on the record, alone or in combination, discloses e) merging the 3D surface geometry measurement data of the subsequent layer with previous 3D surface geometry measurement data by transforming the captured 3D surface geometry measurement data of the layers into a common reference coordinate system to form a merged 3D model of the layers, and h) repeating steps c) to g) until the factory joint is completed.
Claims 2-12 depend from claim 1 with respective additional limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAIXIA DU whose telephone number is (571)270-5646. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am-4:00 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, Kee Tung can be reached at 571-272-7794. 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.
/HAIXIA DU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights