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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "second annular member 140" and "third annular member 146" have both been used to designate the same part (see figure 6). 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 because in figure 6, there is a line missing adjacent to reference character 134 (see flange of annular member below annular member 134) for examining purposes both 122 and 134 are equivalent. 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 § 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) 1-2, 12-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Persson (US 9,822,918).
With regards to claim 1, Persson discloses a bending restrictor assembly (600) for permanently bending and restraining ovality of a subsea pipeline, the bending restrictor assembly comprising: a pipeline section (602) having an outer diameter and a first end and a second end; a first overlying pipe section (604) having a wall overlying a portion of said pipeline section at the first end thereof, said first overlying pipe section having an inner diameter greater than the outer diameter of said pipeline section; a second overlying pipe section (606) having a wall overlying another portion of said pipeline section at the second end thereof, said second overlying pipe section having an inner diameter greater than the outer diameter of said pipeline section; and a plurality of annular members (620, 622, 624) overlying said pipeline section between the first and second overlying pipe sections, said plurality of annular members being translatable along said pipeline section as said pipeline section is bent so as to allow said pipeline section to bend beyond an elastic limit of said pipeline section so as to achieve a permanent bend of said pipeline section (figures 12-13; col. 11, line 34 to col. 12, line 51).
As to claim 2, Persson discloses said first overlying pipe section (604) having at least one flange (608) extending radially outwardly thereof, one of said plurality of annular members having a surface (616) bearing against the at least one flange (figure 12).
As to claim 12, Persson discloses each of said first overlying pipe section and said second overlying pipe section being welded to the outer diameter of said pipeline section (col. 6, lines 37-41; figure 12 NOTE: weld is one of many well-known ways of affixing pipes).
As to claim 13, Persson discloses wherein said plurality of annular members (260, 622, 624) are slid onto respective said first overlying pipe section and said second overlying pipe section (figure 12-13).
As to claim 14, Persson discloses wherein each of said plurality of annular members comprises: a first half-cylinder (650); and a second half-cylinder (652) affixed to said first half-cylinder so as to extend entirely around said pipeline section (figure 13).
As to claim 15, Persson discloses aid first half-cylinder being joined to said second half cylinder by set screws or a shrink fit outer band (col. 12, lines 14-28).
As to claim 16-17, Persson wherein said plurality of annular members are in slidable interlocking relation to each other so as to translate relative to a bend of said pipeline section; wherein said plurality of annular members each has an inner diameter slightly spaced from the outer diameter of said pipeline section so as to restrain the ovality of the subsea pipe (col. 4, lines 22-45; col. 9, lines 5-28; figure 6-13).
As to claim 18, Persson discloses wherein said plurality of annular members comprises: a first plurality of annular members engaged with the first and second overlying pipe section (610, 614); a second plurality of annular members (622, 624) having a surface adjacent the outer diameter of said pipeline section; and a third plurality of annular members (620) positioned over and around adjacent pairs of said second plurality of annular members (figure 12-13).
As to claim 20, Persson discloses wherein said second plurality of annular members comprises a collar (622) having a first outwardly extending flange extending therearound in a second outwardly extending flange extending therearound, the first and second outwardly extending flanges formed adjacent opposite ends of the collar (figure 12-13).
As to claim 21, Persson discloses wherein said third plurality of annular members (620,610) comprises a collar having a first inwardly extending surface and a second inwardly extending surface in spaced relation to each other around an inner diameter of said collar (figure 12)
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.
Claim(s) 3-11 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persson (US 9,822,918) in view of Persson (US 9,982,800) (referred to hereinafter as “Persson 800”).
As to claims 3 and 7-8, Persson discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Persson is silent about said first overlying pipe section having a pair of flanges extending circumferentially therearound in a longitudinally spaced relationship to each other, the surface of the one of said plurality of annular members being received between the pair of flanges and wherein said second overlying pipe section has at least one flange extending radially outwardly thereof, one of said plurality of annular members having a surface bearing against the at least one flange of said second overlying pipe section; and said second overlying pipe section having a pair of flanges extending circumferentially therearound and in longitudinally spaced relation to each other, the surface of the one of said plurality of annular members being received between the pair of flanges.. Persson 800’ teaches a similar bending restrictor including said first overlying pipe section (62) having a pair of flanges (72) extending circumferentially therearound in a longitudinally spaced relationship to each other, the surface of the one of said plurality of annular members being received between the pair of flanges and wherein a second overlying pipe section (64) has at least one flange (74) extending radially outwardly thereof, one of said plurality of annular members having a surface bearing against the at least one flange of said second overlying pipe section; said second overlying pipe section having a pair of flanges extending circumferentially therearound and in longitudinally spaced relation to each other, the surface of the one of said plurality of annular members being received between the pair of flanges (figure 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the overlying pipe sections to include a pair of flanges as taught by Persson 800’, since it would provide better locking mechanism between parts.
As to claims 4-6 and 9-11, Persson as modified above discloses the one of said plurality of annular members (614) having an inwardly extending portion formed away from the surface received between the plurality of flanges of said first overlying pipe section (Persson figure 12; Persson 800’ figure 4); wherein said plurality of annular members (622) further comprises: another annular member having a first outwardly extending flange received by the portion of the surface of the one of said plurality of flanges, said another annular member having an inner surface translatable with respect to the outer diameter of said pipeline section; wherein the another annular member has a second outwardly extending flange formed in spaced relation to the first outwardly extending flange (figure 12).
As to claim 19, Persson as modified above discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Persson as modified above is silent about wherein said first plurality of annular members and comprises a collar having three inwardly extending surfaces extending around an inner diameter thereof, the three inwardly extending surfaces being in spaced relation to each other. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have three inwardly extending surface as claimed, since it has been held that a mere duplicate of the essential working parts only involves routine skill in the art. In this case one skilled in the art would have known to use two or three flanges on collars (610, 620, 614) depending on the desired connection between parts.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARIB A OQUENDO whose telephone number is (571)270-7411. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5:30pm.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571-270-5281. 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.
/CARIB A OQUENDO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights