DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim(s) 1-4, 10-11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1).
Claim(s) 5-8 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Claim(s) 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Europe on 05/05/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the EP 24161584 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “marking unit”, “measuring unit”, “transmitting and receiving unit”, “control unit”, “laser unit”, “steering unit”, “evaluation unit”, “storage unit” and “drive unit” in claims 1-16.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-4, 10-11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by US Publication 2015/0321280 to Einav et al.
In regards to claims 1-4, 10-11 and 16, Einav discloses and shows in Figures 1-10B, a mobile inspection device for inspecting a round weld of a large pipe (par. 2), comprising:
a movable inspection carriage (1) as a mobile base unit, comprising at least three wheels which are mounted on the base unit (par. 29-30, 58, 60, 64; wherein the system includes a robotic cart with four wheels, which is capable of moving around pipes and cylinders),
at least one marking unit which is attached to the mobile base unit (par. 18, 62, 85, 118-120; wherein an engraving tool or a paint or dye tool may be utilized);
at least one measuring unit (4) for inspecting the weld (par. 18-19, 28, 31, 59, 73, 80, 131-133; wherein a laser sensor and detector are utilized to perform quality assurance measurements on the weld);
at least one transmitting and receiving unit (par. 63, 136; wherein the device may be connected by Bluetooth or Wifi);
at least one control unit (par. 63) (Figure1);
wherein the at least one measuring unit, the at least one transmitting and receiving unit, and the at least one control unit are attached to the mobile base unit (Figure 3A), and the measuring unit is a laser unit (par. 73, 80, 133; wherein a laser and camera system may be utilized);
[claim 16] further comprising a drive unit (par. 21, 33, 60);
[claim 2] wherein the laser unit has at least one laser head with an emitter which emits at least one laser beam, and which has at least one detector which captures the reflected laser beam, wherein the laser unit is a light-laser unit (par. 73, 80, 133; wherein a laser and camera system may be utilized);
[claim 3] wherein the measuring unit is attached to the base unit via a mounting device with an adjusting device (11) (par. 75; wherein the system includes an adjustable height mechanism) and the distance between the pipe surface and laser is adjusted using the adjusting device (par. 17, 64; wherein the system includes detachable cartridges for the various system modules);
[claim 4] wherein the inspection carriage comprises a steering unit (50-53), the steering unit is connected to the wheels, and the steering unit steers the wheels (par. 33, 90-93; wherein the system is steered around pipe by guide chains, wires, or belts);
[claim 10] wherein the at least three wheels are magnetic wheels (par. 30; wherein the attachment means may be magnetic);
[claim 11] further comprises an evaluation unit which evaluates the data obtained from the at least one measuring unit and the evaluation unit (30) preferably comprises a storage unit (31) which stores the data obtained from the at least one measuring unit and the data generated by the evaluation unit (par. 115-116, 131-139; wherein a laser imaging system may perform quality assurance measurements on a weld, which may be saved in a computer memory).
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) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Einav, in view of US Patent 5,559,673 to Gagnon et al.
In regards to claim 5, Einav discloses and shows in Figure 1, a modular potable welding system, which includes a Graphic User Interface (GUI) control system, wherein GUIs are generally understood to be basic computers, which include various chips and software.
Einav differs from the limitations in that it is silent to the system further comprising:
[claim 5] wherein the at least one control unit is enclosed in an instrument housing with a filter system, and a positive pressure is preferably applied to the housing interior.
However, Gagnon teaches and shows in Figures 1-13, a dual-filtered computer cooling system, wherein a plurality of filters and fans are utilized to provide a positive-pressure airflow through a housing of a computer (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Einav to include the cooling and filter system discussed above for the advantages of removing dust, as well as increasing airflow and cooling of computer components, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Einav, in view of US Publication 2009/0114738 to Annese et al.
In regards to claims 6-8, Einav differs from the limitations in that it is silent to the system further comprising:
[claim 6] wherein the at least one marking unit comprises at least one marking head, at least one reservoir for paint, and a paint line between the at least one marking head and the at least one reservoir;
[claim 7] wherein the at least one marking head of the at least one marking unit is connected to the at least one control unit and the at least one control unit controls the at least one marking head;
[claim 8] wherein the at least one marking unit comprises a pressure-controlled hose pump, the pressure-controlled hose pump is connected to the at least one reservoir, and the pressure-controlled hose pump pumps the paint from the at least one reservoir to the, at least one marking head, wherein the pressure-controlled hose pump preferably comprises a diaphragm pressure switch.
However, Annese teaches and shows in Figures 1-3, a self-moving device for spraying paint or fluids onto a surface (abstract), further comprising at least one marking head (10), at least one reservoir for paint (4), and a paint line (9) between the at least one marking head and the at least one reservoir (par. 21, 25-26);
wherein the at least one marking head of the at least one marking unit is connected to the at least one control unit (7) and the at least one control unit controls the at least one marking head (par. 21, 23-24);
wherein the at least one marking unit comprises a pressure-controlled hose pump (8), the pressure-controlled hose pump is connected to the at least one reservoir, and the pressure-controlled hose pump pumps the paint from the at least one reservoir to the, at least one marking head, wherein the pressure-controlled hose pump preferably comprises a diaphragm pressure switch (par. 21, 25-27; wherein a plurality of precision pumps may be utilized and wherein the type of pump and nozzle may be selected based upon application needs; wherein diaphragm pressure switch pumps are well-known to those of ordinary skill in the art).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Einav to include the paint spraying system discussed above for the advantages of autonomously and accurately applying desired paint markings to a surface, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Einav, in view of US Patent 4,213,345 to DuFour.
In regards to claims 12-14, Einav discloses and shows in Figures 2-6b, a method for inspecting a round weld on a large pipe, comprising the steps:
providing the mobile inspection device (par. 2, 11, 18-19, 58-59);
placing the mobile inspection device onto a pipe surface in a region of the weld (Figure 4) (par. 82);
moving the movable inspection carriage of the mobile inspection device along the weld and simultaneously measuring the quality of the weld using the at least one measuring unit by emitting a laser beam with at least one emitter and capturing the reflected beam with a detector (par. 73, 80, 114-116, 131-136; wherein the system performs quality assurance of the welds);
transmitting the measured values to the at least one control unit and comparing a measured value with a target value (par. 73, 80, 114-116, 131-136; wherein the system may utilize Bluetooth or WiFi communication, and a system memory may store obtained data); and
if a measured value deviates from the target value, transmitting a signal to the at least one marking unit, activating the at least one marking unit, and marking the pipe surface using the at least one marking unit (par. 114-117, 120, 131-138; wherein previous data may be utilized and referenced).
[claim 13] wherein the measured values transmitted in step e) are transmitted to a storage unit and are stored on the storage unit (par. 114-116, 138).
Einav differs from the limitations in that it is silent to the system further comprising:
[claim 12] providing a pipe having a round weld on a turning device;
[claim 14] wherein in step a), the pipe is provided on the turning device and that, while the movable inspection carriage moves along the weld according to step d), the pipe is turned about its longitudinal axis against a direction of travel of the movable inspection carriage.
However, Dufour teaches and shows in Figures 1, a pipe inspection system, wherein tubular goods are supported by a plurality of drive rollers for rotating the pipe, while an inspection transducer is scanned along the longitudinal axis, such that helical paths of the pipe surface are inspected (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Einav to include the rotating roller worktable discussed above for the advantage of rapidly scanning an entire pipe surface, with a reasonable expectation of success.
In regards to claim 15, Einav differs from the limitations in that it is silent to the system and method further comprising: wherein the pipe has a diameter of at least 6 m.
However, pipe having a diameter of 6 m is well-known to those of ordinary skill in the art. Further, the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims (MPEP 2115).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Einav to include inspecting pipe having a diameter of 6 m for the advantage of inspecting the quality of welds on large diameter pipes, which may be difficult and time-consuming for a person to inspect, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As to claim 9, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious, “a mobile inspection device for inspecting a round weld of a large pipe” further comprising a paint marking unit which includes a paint reservoir mounted to a rotatable bearing on a base unit, in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claim.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN M HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1736. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8am to 4pm.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at 571-270-5789. 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.
JONATHAN M. HANSEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2877
/JONATHAN M HANSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights