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 .
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: a) in lines 2 & 5, delete “Xx” after the word “axis”; b) in line 3, “a tubular good” should be change to --the tubular good-- in order to avoid a duplicant positive recitation; c) in line 12, delete the numbers after “eddy current test sensors” and “the scanning electronics”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-7 are objected to because of the following informalities: in line 1 of all claims, “a tubular good” should be change to --the tubular good-- in order to avoid a duplicant positive recitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sutherland (US Pub No 2011/0167914) in view of Wernicke (US 5,565,633).
PNG
media_image1.png
485
822
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
462
571
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
339
860
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Sutherland discloses [see Figs. 1A-1B] an inspection device (inspection tool 1) for a tubular good comprising a first body part (left side of Fig. 1A), a mains axis (middle of Fig. 1A) corresponding to the direction of displacement of the inspection device (1) along the length of the tubular good, a second body part (right of Fig 1A) rotatably mounted on the first body part (left side of Fig 1A), whereas the first body part (left side of Fig. 1A) comprises an odometer (odometer 25), an array of geometric profilometers (caliper transducer/sensor 10) arranged to measure radial coordinates of internal surface of the tubular good, the first body part (left side of Fig. 1A) further comprising a profilometer electronics arranged to store in a first memory (memory 80) each measured radial coordinates each associated with a circumferential position and a time stamp and the second body part (right side of Fig 1A) comprises at least one array of eddy current test sensors (eddy current EC) and a scanning electronics [see paragraph [0034] for details] arranged to collect and compute signals received by eddy current test sensors (EC) into response signals, the scanning electronics being further arranged to store each response signal associated with a corresponding time stamp in a second memory [see paragraphs [0034]-[0041] for details]. However, the prior art does not disclose a body motor as claimed. Wernicke discloses [see Fig. 7] an inspection device (tractor pig 160) for a tubular good comprising a first body part (section 164), a second body part (section 162) rotatably mounted [via u-joint 200] on the first body part (164), and a body motor (motor 210) arranged to rotate the second body part (162) around axis relatively to the first body part (164). Further, Wernicke teaches that the addition of motor is advantageous because it is operatively coupled for rotating the sections relative to each other, so that the relative rolling contact angles between the first section and the second section causes at least one of the pigs to spiral through the pipeline, thereby providing axial movement to the pig. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of Sutherland by adding body motor as taught by Wernicke in order to rotating the sections relative to each other, so that the relative rolling contact angles between the first section and the second section causes at least one of the pigs to spiral through thereby providing axial movement to the pig.
Regarding claim 2, Sutherland discloses wherein profilometers (10) are distributed circumferentially on 360° and opposite each other and profilometer electronics is arranged to output internal diameter measurements [see paragraph [0038] for details].
Regarding claim 3, Sutherland discloses wherein profilometer electronics is arranged to compute profile lines data computed from measurements of opposite profilometers (10) and odometer (25) [see paragraphs [0034]-[0036] for details].
Regarding claim 4, Sutherland discloses wherein profilometer electronics is arranged to compute a mapping of internal surface of the tubular good by interpolation of data between profile lines data [see paragraphs [0049]-[0058] for details].
Regarding claim 5, Sutherland discloses wherein profilometer electronics is arranged to output a first set of data associating a profilometer identification, a position measurement and time stamp, and to compute a second set of data associating a circumferential position, a radial position, a time stamp [see paragraphs [0049]-[0058] for details].
Regarding claim 6, Sutherland discloses a third electronics arranged to compute from the first set of data and the second set of data a defects heat map of internal surface [see paragraphs [0046]-[0047] & [0064] for details].
Regarding claim 7, Sutherland discloses multiple arms (arms 40) mounted on the second body part (right side of Fig. 1A), the eddy current test sensors (EC) being housed in a corresponding shoe, each shoe being mounted on a top part being pivotably mounted on a lower part, said lower part being pivotably mounted on the second body part [see paragraphs [0034]-[0035] for details].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for details.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERMELE M HOLLINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-1960. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-3:30pm.
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, Lee E Rodak can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
/JERMELE M HOLLINGTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
