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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Claim 24 recites brakes. Therefore, the claimed brakes must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 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:
Connecting member in claims 16, 20, 21, 26, 27 and 31.
Guiding device in claims 16, 20-22, 26, 29-31.
Support device in claims 17-19, 27-28.
Lifting device in claims 19, 28.
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
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) 26-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schuring (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2019/0299343).
As per claim 26, Schuring discloses a disassembly tool configured for disassembling a segmented blade for a wind turbine, the segmented blade including a first segment and a second segment, the second segment including a connecting member extending into the first segment, the disassembly tool comprising: a tool base (12; figure 4) to be positioned below the connecting member while the connecting member is being removed from the first segment (platform 12 positioned below blade sections 7, 8, i.e., to be positioned below the connecting member located within the first blade segment; figure 4); and a guiding device (20) connected to the tool base (as shown; figure 4), wherein the guiding device comprises a top portion (22; figure 4) configured to be positioned above the connecting member to limit a mobility of the connecting member while the connecting member is being removed from the first segment (blade sections 7, 8 are supported by support stand 22, i.e., when the entire blade section is supported, the mobility of the connecting member within the blade is also limited; paragraph [0065]).
As per claim 27, Schuring discloses the disassembly tool of claim 26, and further discloses a support device (12, 23-26, 28, 29, collectively; figure 5) connected to toolbase (12), and wherein positioning the disassembly tool comprises bringing the support device into contact with the first segment (as shown; figure 5).
As per claim 28, Schuring discloses the disassembly tool of claim 27, and further discloses wherein the support device (12, 23-26, 28, 29, collectively; figure 5) comprises a lifting device (hydraulic actuators for cradles 28, 29; paragraph [0070]) and a contact member (28, 29), the lifting device connected to the tool base (as show; figure 5), and wherein the lifting device is configured for lifting the contact member in a vertical direction relative to the tool base (as shown; figure 5).
As per claim 29, Schuring discloses the disassembly tool of claim 26, and further discloses wherein the guiding device comprises a height adjustment device (23-26; figure 4) for adjusting a height of the top portion (by adjusting height of mobile factory 20; figure 6).
As per claim 30, Schuring discloses the disassembly tool of claim 26, and further discloses wherein the guiding device further comprises a lateral portion connecting the tool base and the top portion of the guiding device (side walls of mobile factory 20 shown connecting between the top portion and base 12; figure 4), the lateral portion configured to be arranged laterally with respect to the connecting member while the connecting member is being removed from the first segment (as shown; figure 6).
As per claim 31, Schuring discloses a segmented blade assembly for a wind turbine, comprising a segmented blade comprising a first segment and a second segment (7, 8; figure 4), the second segment comprising a connecting member configured to extend into the first segment in an assembled state of the segmented blade (male-female type mechanical connection, i.e., a male end of one blade section inserted to a female end of the other blade section; paragraph [0107]); and a disassembly tool (12, 20, collectively; figure 4) configured for disassembling the segmented blade, the disassembly tool comprising (platform 12, and mobile factory 20 has the structure capable of using it in disassembly, which is merely reversal of the assembly shown in figure 6); a tool base (12) for positioning below the connecting member while the connecting member is being removed from the first segment (as shown; figure 5); and a guiding device (20) connected to the tool base, wherein the guiding device comprises a top portion (22; figure 4) configured for positioning above the connecting member to limit a mobility of the connecting member while the connecting member is being removed from the first segment (blade sections 7, 8 are supported by support stand 22, i.e., when the entire blade section is supported, the mobility of the connecting member within the blade is also limited; paragraph [0065]).
Claim(s) 26, 27, 29 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nies (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2022/0195981).
As per claim 26, Nies (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2022/0195981) discloses a disassembly tool configured for disassembling a segmented blade for a wind turbine, the segmented blade including a first segment and a second segment, the second segment including a connecting member extending into the first segment, the disassembly tool comprising:
a tool base (58; figure 5A) to be positioned below the connecting member while the connecting member is being removed from the first segment (gripper configured to support a segmented blade at a blade joint (connecting member) of the segmented blade for unmounting; paragraph [0075]; as shown, lower gripping member 58 engages the underside of the blade 22 having such blade joint; figure 5B); and a guiding device connected to the tool base, wherein the guiding device comprises a top portion configured to be positioned above the connecting member to limit a mobility of the connecting member while the connecting member is being removed from the first segment (upper gripping member 58 engages the top portion of blade 22; figure 5B).
As per claim 27 Niles discloses the disassembly tool of claim 26, further comprising a support device connected to the tool base, the support device configured to contact the first segment of the segmented blade while the connecting member is being removed from the first segment (gripper pad 64 (support device) connected to gripping member 58 to engage blade surface; figure 5B).
As per claim 29 Niles discloses the disassembly tool of claim 26, wherein the guiding device comprises a height adjustment device for adjusting a height of the top portion (via actuator 66; figures 5A, 5B).
As per claim 30 Niles discloses the disassembly tool of claim 26, wherein the guiding device further comprises a lateral portion (gripping frame 51; figure 5A) connecting the tool base and the top portion of the guiding device (gripping frame 51 connects two gripping members 58 (tool base and a portion of guiding device); figure 5A), the lateral portion configured to be arranged laterally with respect to the connecting member while the connecting member is being removed from the first segment (gripper frame 51 is arranged laterally with respect to internal components of the wind turbine 22 which would include the blade joint; figure 5B).
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) 16-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schuring in view of Hibbard (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2012/0269643).
While claim 16 deals with a method of disassembling a segmented blade including a first segment and a second segment (7, 8), Schuring teaches a method of assembling a segmented blade for a wind turbine and does not explicitly teach the disassembly of it. Hibbard is an analogous prior art in that it deals with a segmented wind turbine blade. Hibbard teaches dissembling and non-destructive separation of the blade sections from each other for repair and replacement (paragraph [0048]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Schuring’s method of assembly to a method of disassembly from the teachings of Hibbard for repair and replacement. The person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that disassembly is merely a reversal of the assembly process.
When Schuring’s method of assembly is reversed (reversal of figures 6, 7), the it would have all claimed features of claim 1: providing the segmented blade in an assembled state (figure 6.3), wherein a connecting member of the second segment extends into the first segment (male-female joint type mechanical connection; paragraph [0107]); removing the connecting member partially from the first segment (blade sections 7 and 8 are partially disconnected, i.e., the male-female joint disengaged; figure 6.2), wherein removing the connecting member comprises exposing a first region of the connecting member (blade sections 7 and 8 are partially disconnected, i.e., the male-female joint disengaged; figure 6.2; also see figure 2 of Hibbard for illustration); positioning a disassembly tool (12, 13, 20, collectively; figure 4) having a tool base (12) and a guiding device (20) connected to the tool base (as shown; figure 4), wherein the tool base is positioned below the connecting member (platform 12 is below blade sections 7, 8, i.e., also below the connecting member disposed within blade sections 7, 8; figure 5), and wherein a top portion (22; figure 4) of the guiding device is positioned in the first region and above the connecting member to limit a mobility of the connecting member (blade sections 7, 8 are supported by support stand 22, i.e., when the entire blade section is supported, the mobility of the connecting member within the blade is also limited; paragraph [0065]); and removing the connecting member entirely from the first segment after positioning the disassembly tool (blade sections are completely disengaged, i.e., the male-female joint completely disengaged; figure 6.1; also see figure 2 of Hibbard for illustration).
As per claim 17, Schuring in view of Hibbard discloses the method of claim 16. Schuring further discloses wherein the disassembly tool further comprises a support device (12, 23-26, 28, 29, collectively; figure 5), and wherein positioning the disassembly tool comprises bringing the support device into contact with the first segment (as shown; figure 5).
As per claim 18, Schuring in view of Hibbard discloses the method of claim 17. Schuring further discloses wherein positioning the disassembly tool comprises positioning the support device below the first segment before bringing the support device into contact with the first segment (cradles 28 and 29 are positioned below blade sections 7, 8 before they are in contact with blade sections 7, 8; figure 6.3).
As per claim 19, Schuring in view of Hibbard discloses the method of claim 17. Schuring further discloses wherein the support device (12, 23-26, 28, 29, collectively; figure 5) comprises a lifting device (hydraulic actuators for cradles 28, 29; paragraph [0070]) and a contact member (28, 29), and wherein bringing the support device into contact with the first segment comprises lifting up the contact member using the lifting device such that the contact member contacts the first segment (paragraphs [0066], [0067]).
As per claim 20, Schuring in view of Hibbard discloses the method of claim 16. Schuring further discloses wherein positioning the disassembly tool comprises positioning a bottom portion of the guiding device in the first region and below the connecting member to limit a mobility of the connecting member in a downward direction (a portion of mobile factory 20 (guiding device) is below the blades sections 7, 8 and mobile factory 20 is capable of limiting the movement of connecting member within blade sections 7, 8; figure 4).
As per claim 21, Schuring in view of Hibbard discloses the method of claim 16. Schuring further discloses wherein removing the connecting member entirely from the first segment comprises sliding the connecting member (male-female joint, i.e., a sliding engagement; paragraph [0107]) along the top portion of the guiding device (the top portion of mobile factory 20 covers the joint area, i.e., the sliding action will be along a length of mobile factory 20; figures 4, 5).
As per claim 22, Schuring in view of Hibbard discloses the method of claim 16. Schuring further discloses wherein the guiding device comprises a height adjustment device for adjusting a height of the top portion (actuators 23-26 are capable of adjusting height of the top portion mobile factory 20; figures 5, 6).
As per claim 23, Schuring in view of Hibbard discloses the method of claim 22. Schuring further discloses adjusting the height of the top portion before positioning the disassembly tool (in the reverse order, the height of mobile factory 20 is adjusted before engaging blade sections 7, 8; figure 6).
As per claim 24, Schuring in view of Hibbard discloses the method of claim 16. Schuring further discloses wherein the disassembly tool further comprises wheels for moving the disassembly tool (actuators 23-26 including wheels with electric drive; paragraph [0059]).
While Schuring does not expliclty teach wherein the wheels have brakes for braking the wheels, and wherein positioning the disassembly tool comprises immobilizing the disassembly tool by braking the wheels using the brakes, the Examiner takes an Official Notice that the use of brakes on wheels to temporarily fix a heavy machinery to before operating to prevent unwanted and accidental movement is well known in the art. This is especially important in view of Schuring because Schruing emphasizes “precise alignment” of parts (paragraph [0107]). Therefore, in order to prevent unwanted movement and allow precise alignment, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Schuring’s wheels to be braked before operating.
As per claim 25, Schuring in view of Hibbard discloses the method of claim 16. Schuring further discloses wherein the first segment is a root-side segment of the segmented blade (root side blade 8; figure 2), and wherein the second segment is a tip-side segment of the segmented blade (tip side blade 7).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hansen (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2015/0337799) teaches a clamp for blade tip.
Livingston (U.S. Patent No. 8,240,962) teaches a jig for assembling a segmented wind turbine blade.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG K KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-1324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 pm EST.
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, Courtney Heinle can be reached at (571)270-3508. 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.
/SANG K KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745