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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: each element of the claim is not separated by a line indentation as required by 37 CFR 1,75(i). See MPEP 608.01 (m) for further information. 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 13-25 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 13, the transitional phrase “having” in line 1 is unclear. The transitional phrase of “having” must be interpreted in light of the specification, therefore for purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “having” to mean “comprising”. Further, the wording of “a number of sliding tube units” in line 1 is confusing. How can the number of sliding tube units be any number? Zero is a number. Negative numbers are numbers. These numbers would not be possible. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “a number of sliding tube units” to mean “one or more sliding tube units”. Further, it is unclear which element is being referenced by “and having” in line 5 because the limitation occurs after a comma. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “and having” to mean “each sliding tube unit further comprising”. Further, the wording of “wherein at least one load measuring element receptacle extending in the axial direction is designed in at least some sliding tubes” in lines 6-8 is confusing. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the axial direction”. It is unclear whether “some sliding tubes” are the same as or different than, and in addition to, “a sliding tube” in lines 2-3 because of the double positive recitation of “sliding tube”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “wherein at least one load measuring element receptacle extending in the axial direction is designed in at least some sliding tubes” to mean “wherein at least one load measuring element receptacle extending in an axial direction is positioned in at least some of the one or more sliding tubes”. Finally, the wording of “that the or each load measuring element receptacle is designed in a blind hole manner and that a load measuring element is arranged in at least one load measuring element receptacle” in lines 8-10 is confusing. It is unclear which element is being referenced by “that” because the limitation occurs after a comma. The limitation “designed in a blind hole manner” is unclear because the metes and bounds of what would be considered “blind hole manner” are not defined. It is unclear whether “a load measuring element” is the same as or different than, and in addition to, “a load measuring element” in line 5 because of the double positive recitation of “a load measuring element”. It is unclear whether “at least one load measuring element receptacle” is the same as or different than, and in addition to, “at least one load measuring element receptacle” in lines 6-7 because of the double positive recitation of “at least one load measuring element receptacle”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “that the or each load measuring element receptacle is designed in a blind hole manner and that a load measuring element is arranged in at least one load measuring element receptacle” to mean “wherein the or each load measuring element receptacle is a blind hole and one of the at least one load measuring elements is arranged in at least one of the at least one load measuring element receptacles”. Claims 14-24 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 14, the wording of “the load measuring elements” in line 3 is unclear because the limitation requires plural load measuring elements while the previously recited “at least one load measuring element” could be a single load measuring element. Are more than one load measuring elements now required? For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “the load measuring elements” to mean “the or each load measuring element”.
Regarding claim 15, the limitation “line- or strip-like” in lines 5-6 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what aspect of a line or strip is required to satisfy the claim limitation. Does line- or strip-like require a linear object? A long and narrow object? For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “line- or strip-like” to mean “continuous”.
Regarding claim 16, the wording of “each load measuring element is arranged on the head portion of at least one load sensor part” in lines 1-3 is confusing. The head portion is part of the load measuring element, therefore it is not possible to position the load measuring element on the head of itself. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “each load measuring element is arranged on the head portion of at least one load sensor part” to mean “each load measuring element includes at least one load sensor part arranged on the head portion thereof”.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the side” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “the region” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 19, the wording of “a number of load measuring element bushings” in line 2 is confusing. How can the number of load measuring element bushings be any number? Zero is a number. Negative numbers are numbers. These numbers would not be possible. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “a number of load measuring element bushings” to mean “one or more load measuring element bushings”.
Regarding claim 24, the wording of “and in that a wall recess is designed in a wall of the connection chamber in the region of the connecting cable plug” in lines 2-4 is confusing. The limitation “and in that a” seems to have too many words. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the region”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “and in that a wall recess is designed in a wall of the connection chamber in the region of the connecting cable plug” to mean “and a wall recess is designed in a wall of the connection chamber in a region of the connecting cable plug”.
Regarding claim 25, it is unclear whether “at least one sliding tube” in line 6 is the same as or different than, and in addition to, “a sliding tube” in line 3 because of the double positive recitation of “sliding tube”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “at least one sliding tube” to mean “the sliding tube”.
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.
Claims 13, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 25 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhuo et al (CN 108286438).
Regarding claim 13, Zhuo discloses a tunnel boring machine (e.g. paragraph 0006) having a number of sliding tube units (e.g. 1, 2 and 4, Fig. 1), each with a sliding tube flange (e.g. rightmost thickened portion of 1, Fig. 1), with a sliding tube bearing ring (e.g. leftmost thickened portion of 1, Fig. 1) and with a sliding tube which is connected to the sliding tube flange and to the sliding tube bearing ring (e.g. middle portion of 1 and 4, Fig. 1) and in which one excavation tool is displaceably mounted for a tool change (e.g. 102, Fig. 1), and having at least one load measuring element which is configured to measure loads exerted on excavation tools (e.g. 5, Fig. 1, paragraph 0030), wherein at least one load measuring element receptacle extending in the axial direction is designed in at least some sliding tubes (e.g. receptacle for 5, Fig. 1), that the or each load measuring element receptacle is designed in a blind hole manner (e.g. Fig. 1) and that a load measuring element is arranged in at least one load measuring element receptacle (e.g. Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Zhuo further discloses that each sliding tube is connected to a respective sliding tube bearing ring on the side opposite the load measuring element (e.g. Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 18, Zhuo further discloses that each sliding tube rests against a respective sliding tube flange in the region of the load measuring element (e.g. Fig. 1, wherein the integral structure is considered to have sections resting against each other, and/or wherein 4 is considered the flange).
Regarding claim 20, Zhuo further discloses that each load measuring element is connected to a connecting cable for outputting electrical signals (e.g. 5, Fig. 1, paragraph 0030, wherein the bolt is considered the load measuring element and the wire is considered the connecting cable).
Regarding claim 21, Zhuo further discloses that a mounting protective housing is present into which the connecting cable opens (e.g. 5, Fig. 1, paragraph 0030, wherein the bolt is considered the mounting protective housing into which the wire opens).
Regarding claim 25, Zhuo discloses a tunnel boring machine (e.g. paragraph 0006) comprising: sliding tube units (e.g. 1, 103, 2 and 4, Fig. 1), each having: a sliding tube (e.g. 1, Fig. 1) extending between and connected to both a sliding tube flange (e.g. 4, Fig. 1) and a sliding tube bearing ring (e.g. 103, Fig. 1), and one excavation tool displaceably mounted for a tool change within the sliding tube (e.g. 102, Fig. 1), wherein at least one sliding tube includes an axially extending, blind receptacle for receiving a load measuring element for measuring loads exerted on the excavation tool associated with the sliding tube having the receptacle (e.g. receptable for 5, Fig. 1, paragraph 0030).
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.
Claims 14-16 and 19 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhuo et al (CN 108286438) alone.
Regarding claim 14, Zhuo discloses the invention substantially as applied above and further discloses that the load measuring elements have an externally threaded portion (e.g. paragraph 0030 wherein bolts are threaded fasteners) but Zhuo does not explicitly disclose that the load measuring element receptacle has an internally threaded region. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include an internally threaded region in the load measuring element receptacle of Zhuo for the expected benefit of securing the load measuring element to the load measuring element receptacle, thereby ensuring that the bolts do not fall out during use.
Regarding claim 15, Zhuo further discloses that each load measuring element comprises an end portion (e.g. leftmost end of 5, Fig.’s 1 and 3) and a head portion extending between the end portion and the externally threaded portion (e.g. left side portion of 5, Fig.’s 1 and 3, wherein Examiner notes that the right side portion of 5 is considered the externally threaded portion and the left side portion of 5 is considered the head portion, with both portions including threads), wherein the end portion and the termination of the load measuring element receptacle designed in the sliding tube are shaped such that a line- or strip- like peripheral contact region is designed between the end portion and the termination of the load measuring element receptacle designed in the sliding tube (e.g. Fig.’s 1 and 3, wherein the flat surfaces create a continuous contact region).
Regarding claim 16, Zhuo further discloses that each load measuring element includes at least one load sensor part inside the load measuring element (e.g. wire, Fig. 1, paragraph 0030), but does not explicitly disclose that the load sensor part is arranged on the head portion. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to extend the wire throughout the length of the bolt, thereby arranging the load sensor part on the head portion inside the load measuring element, for the expected benefit of allowing force measurement along the entire length of the bolt.
Regarding claim 19, Zhuo discloses the invention substantially as applied above but does not explicitly disclose that the sliding tube flange has a number of load measuring element bushings corresponding to the number of load measuring element receptacles designed in the sliding tube, which load measuring element bushings are aligned with the respectively associated load measuring element receptacle. The examiner takes official notice that bushings are notoriously well known in the art. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add a bushing to each bolt hole (thereby the sliding tube flange having a number of load measuring element bushings corresponding to the number of load measuring element receptacles designed in the sliding tube, which load measuring element bushings are aligned with the respectively associated load measuring element receptacle) for the expected benefit of reducing friction and protecting the flange.
Claims 13, 14, 17, 18 and 20-24 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Himmelsbach et al (WO 2020/193164) in view of Barwart et al (US 2017/0122130).
Regarding claim 13, Himmelsbach discloses a tunnel boring machine (e.g. paragraph 0032) having a number of sliding tube units (e.g. 203, 306, 309 and 315, Fig.’s 3 and 9), each with a sliding tube flange (e.g. 306, Fig.’s 3 and 9), with a sliding tube bearing ring (e.g. 309 and/or 315, Fig.’s 3 and 9) and with a sliding tube which is connected to the sliding tube flange and to the sliding tube bearing ring (e.g. 203, Fig.’s 3 and 9) and in which one excavation tool is displaceably mounted for a tool change (e.g. 209, Fig.’s 3 and 9), and having at least one load measuring element which is configured to measure loads exerted on excavation tools (e.g. 812 connected to 612 and 615, Fig.’s 6 and 9), wherein at least one load measuring element receptacle extending in the axial direction is designed in at least some sliding tubes (e.g. 906, Fig. 9), and that a load measuring element is arranged in at least one load measuring element receptacle (e.g. 812, Fig. 9). Himmelsbach does not disclose that the load measuring element receptacle is designed in a blind hole manner. Barwart teaches a tunnel boring machine (e.g. 180, Fig. 1) having a number of sliding tube units (e.g. 104, 126 and 500, Fig.’s 1, 5 and 7), each with a sliding tube flange (e.g. 500, Fig.’s 5 and 7), with a sliding tube bearing ring (e.g. 126, Fig.’s 1 and 7) and with a sliding tube which is connected to the sliding tube flange and to the sliding tube bearing ring (e.g. 104, Fig.’s 1 and 7) and in which one excavation tool is displaceably mounted for a tool change (e.g. 106, Fig. 1), and having at least one load measuring element which is configured to measure loads exerted on excavation tools (e.g. 112/177, Fig. 5), wherein at least one load measuring element receptacle extending in the axial direction is designed in at least some sliding tubes (e.g. receptacle for 177, Fig. 5), that the or each load measuring element receptacle is designed in a blind hole manner (e.g. Fig. 5) and that a load measuring element is arranged in at least one load measuring element receptacle (e.g. 177, Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a load measuring element in a blind hole load measuring element receptacle as taught by Barwart for the load measuring element and load measuring element receptacle of Himmelsbach because such is a known configuration for load measuring elements that would provide the expected benefit of independence from the fastening screws, thereby increasing the design freedom and synergistic effects (e.g. Barwart, paragraph 0064).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Himmelsbach and Barwart further discloses that the or each load measuring element receptacle designed in the sliding tube has an internally threaded region and the load measuring elements have an externally threaded portion associated with the internally threaded region (e.g. Barwart, paragraph 0064, wherein screwing the sleeve 177 into the receptable requires an internally threaded region in the receptacle and an externally threaded region on the load measuring element).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Himmelsbach and Barwart further discloses that each sliding tube is connected to a respective sliding tube bearing ring on the side opposite the load measuring element (e.g. Himmelsbach, Fig. 9, and Barwart, Fig.’s 5 and 7).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Himmelsbach and Barwart further discloses that each sliding tube rests against a respective sliding tube flange in the region of the load measuring element (e.g. Himmelsbach, Fig. 9, and Barwart, Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Himmelsbach and Barwart further discloses that
each load measuring element is connected to a connecting cable for outputting electrical signals (e.g. Himmelsbach, 503, Fig. 9, and Barwart, 171, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Himmelsbach and Barwart further discloses that a mounting protective housing is present into which the connecting cable opens (e.g. Himmelsbach, portion surrounding 633, Fig.’s 7 and 8).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Himmelsbach and Barwart further discloses that an adapter cable with two connectors is present which is arranged in the mounting protective housing (e.g. Himmelsbach, 806, Fig.’s 7 and 8).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Himmelsbach and Barwart further discloses that the adapter cable is connected to a connecting cable plug which is designed with external contact strips (e.g. Himmelsbach, 636 with 639, Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Himmelsbach and Barwart further discloses that the connecting cable plug is arranged in a connection chamber and in that a wall recess is designed in a wall of the connection chamber in the region of the connecting cable plug (e.g. Himmelsbach, 621 with recess for 521, Fig. 8).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STACY N LAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7515. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-3pm.
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.
/S.N.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3678
/AMBER R ANDERSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights