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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 09/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that examiner’s interpretation of "releasable" and "releaseably" is overly broad and inconsistent with the specification. Applicant further argues that “Applicant's specification provides clear context for these terms. For example, the disclosure describes embodiments where adjacent annular seal segments are connected via a "bolted connection" or with "snap-fit connectors." (Specification; paragraph [0068]). These examples inform a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) that the "releasable" nature of the segment and the "releasably connected" manner of joining contemplate a non-destructive and repeatable mechanical engagement designed to facilitate maintenance and inspection. (Specification; paragraph [0071])”. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Firstly, the filed specifications do not have paragraph numbers, hence it is not clear where in the specification applicant is referring to. Secondly, the examiner did not find any reference in the specification that defines them to be “non-destructive and repeatable.” Moreover, the specification does not make an exclusive definition for the "releasable" or "releaseably" to be a "bolted connection" or with "snap-fit connectors." The specification refers to "bolted connection" and "snap-fit connectors" as mere examples. Applicant seems to be reading the specification into the claims. It is noted that in the remarks, every time applicant wants to refer to "releasable" or "releaseably", they use a modifier such as “non-destructive”, “repeatable”, "bolted connection", "snap-fit connectors." This is because "releasable" and "releaseably" are broad limitations and the specification does not provide an exclusive definition, hence they need to be used with some modifiers to make them narrower. In other words, the claims recite a broad limitation, but applicant is trying to present them as narrower than what they are and hence they repeatedly use modifiers or read the specification into the claims. Furthermore, the specification clearly discloses “At least one of the annular seal segments is releasable. A releasable annular seal segment is an annular seal segment of the plurality of annular seal segments that may be attached and detached from the remaining annular seal segment or segments of the annular seal assembly in an easy manner.” (see page 4; lines 28-31) As it is clear from this passage, applicant’s own specification defines releasable to merely be easy to be attached and detached. The examiner notes that cutting and welding, especially with machines or robots as they are very common, are considered very easy ways to attach and detach. Nowhere in the specification, applicant is forcing a specific definition for "releasable" or "releaseably" other than something to be easy.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16-25 and 27-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rogall et al. (US 20100135607), referred to hereinafter as Rogall.
With regard to claim 16, Rogall discloses a wind turbine comprising: a pitch bearing having a first bearing component (11) coupled to a wind turbine blade (5) and a second bearing component (12) coupled to a rotor hub of the wind turbine ([0018]), the first bearing component being rotatable with respect to the second bearing component, and a lubricant retention system comprising: a base (80 or 82. In a different interpretation, the base is the upper portion of 85 attached to 5. See Fig. 3) for coupling to the wind turbine blade, the base comprising a base outer surface having a shape that contours a surface of the wind turbine blade (Fig. 2); and a plurality of annular seal segments (81. In a different interpretation, the plurality of annular seal segments are different segments of 85 that constitute element 85, see Fig. 3) connected to the base, wherein each annular seal segment of the plurality of annular seal segments is connected (note that the claim doesn’t require direct contact because two elements can be connected to each other through another element) to an adjacent annular seal segment to form an annular seal assembly (Fig. 2, [0018], [0019. Note that Rogall discloses seal assembly maintains the sealing against grease leakage form the pitch bearing ([0019], hence the plurality of annular seal segments are connected to an adjacent annular seal segment. Furthermore, they are connected through element 82), each of the plurality of annular seal segments comprising a distal end portion (Fig. 2), wherein, when the lubricant retention system is mounted on the wind turbine blade, the distal end portions extend towards the second bearing component for defining a chamber for retaining lubricant from the pitch bearing (Fig. 2), and wherein the plurality of annular seal segments comprises a releasable annular seal segment (81) to be releasably connected to another of the annular seal segments of the plurality of annular seal segments (Fig. 2, [0018]. Note that in the absence of a specific mechanism or method of releasing, “releasable” and “releasably” are interpreted as merely having the capacity to be released, which is a broad limitation because most elements are capable of being released. Even if one element is molded to another element as an integral monolithic one-piece element, it can be released through cutting or other machining procedures. See Fig. 2, 3, 5, 7).
With regard to claim 17, Rogall further discloses that the releasable annular seal segment is releasably connected to the base (Fig. 2, 3, 5, [0019]).
With regard to claim 18, Rogall further discloses that the distal end portions of the annular seal segments further extend alongside a portion of a lateral surface of the second bearing component when the lubricant retention system is mounted on the wind turbine blade (Fig. 2, 3, 5).
With regard to claim 19, Rogall further discloses that the plurality of annular seal segments comprises a retention member connected to the distal end portion to reduce a gap between the distal end portion and the second bearing component when the lubricant retention system is mounted on the wind turbine blade (the retention member is the last portion, or outer tip, of element 81 in Fig. 2. It could also be interpreted as element 111 in Fig. 5).
With regard to claim 20, Rogall further discloses that the retention member is detachably connected to the distal end portion of the plurality of annular seal segments (see Fig. 2 and 5. Note that in the absence of a specific mechanism or method of detaching, “detachably” is interpreted as merely having the capacity to be detached, which is a broad limitation because most elements are capable of being detached. Even if one element is molded to another element as an integral monolithic one-piece element, it can be detached through cutting or other machining procedures).
With regard to claim 21, Rogall further discloses that the retention member comprises a brush having a plurality of bristles (see the rejection of claim 19 stating that the retention member is the last portion, or outer tip, of element 81 in Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 22, Rogall further discloses that the retention member extends from the distal end portion of the plurality of annular seal segments to a retention member tip inwardly in a radial direction (Fig. 2, 5).
With regard to claim 23, Rogall further discloses that the plurality of annular seal segments further comprises: a proximal end portion connected to the base and extending parallel to the base, the proximal end portion defining a proximal end portion diameter (Fig. 2, 3, 5. Note that the claim doesn’t define a plane of reference and direction for the diameter).
With regard to claim 24, Rogall further discloses that the plurality of annular seal segments further comprises a central portion connecting the proximal end portion to the distal end portion (Fig. 2, 3, 5).
With regard to claim 25, Rogall further discloses that the distal end portion defines a distal end portion diameter, the distal end portion diameter being greater than a diameter of the proximal end portion (Fig. 2, 3, 5. Note that the claim doesn’t define a plane of reference and direction for the diameter).
With regard to claim 27, Rogall further discloses that the plurality of annular seal segments are releasable annular seal segments (Fig. 2, 3, 5).
With regard to claim 28, Rogall further discloses that the plurality of annular seal segments comprises a plastic material ([0023]).
With regard to claim 29, Rogall further discloses that the lubricant retention system is part of a wind turbine blade (Fig. 2, 3, 5).
With regard to claim 30, Rogall further discloses that the wind turbine blade comprises: a blade shell comprising an inner blade shell surface and an outer blade shell surface (Fig. 2); and a blade root attachment portion (the last portion of element 5 in Fig. 2 that is in attachment connection with 11) configured to attach a blade root portion to the first bearing component of the pitch bearing (Fig. 2), wherein the base of the lubricant retention system is coupled to at least one of the blade shell and the blade root attachment portion (Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 31, Rogall discloses a method for operating a wind turbine having a lubricant retention system, the wind turbine comprising a pitch bearing having a first bearing component (11) coupled to a wind turbine blade and a second bearing component (12) coupled to a rotor hub, the first bearing component being rotatable with respect to the second bearing component, the method comprising: connecting a base (80 or 82. In a different interpretation, the base is the upper portion of 85 attached to 5. See Fig. 3) of the lubricant retention system to a blade root portion of the wind turbine blade, the blade root portion configured for coupling to the first bearing component (Fig. 2, 3, 5); connecting a plurality of annular seal segments (81. In a different interpretation, the plurality of annular seal segments are different segments of 85 that constitute element 85, see Fig. 3) to the base such that a distal end portion of the plurality of annular seal segments extends towards the second bearing component for defining a chamber for retaining lubricant from the pitch bearing (Fig. 2, 3, 5); and connecting the plurality of annular seal segments to each other (note that the claim doesn’t require direct contact because two elements can be connected to each other through another element) to form an annular seal assembly (Fig. 2, [0018], [0019. Note that Rogall discloses seal assembly maintains the sealing against grease leakage form the pitch bearing ([0019], hence the plurality of annular seal segments are connected to an adjacent annular seal segment. Furthermore, they are connected through element 82), wherein connecting the plurality of annular seal segments comprises releasably connecting a releasable annular seal segment of the plurality of annular seal segments to another of the annular seal segments of the plurality of annular seal segments (Fig. 2, [0018]. Note that in the absence of a specific mechanism or method of releasing, “releasable” and “releasably” are interpreted as merely having the capacity to be released, which is a broad limitation because most elements are capable of being released. Even if one element is molded to another element as an integral monolithic one-piece element, it can be released through cutting or other machining procedures. See Fig. 2, 3, 5, 7).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 26 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: with regard to claim 26, the prior art doesn’t disclose that each of the plurality of annular seal segments comprises a stepped edge portion and a flat edge portion, wherein the stepped edge portion of a first annular seal segment overlaps the flat edge portion of an adjacent annular seal segment of the plurality of annular seal segments, and it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application, nor any motivation, to modify the prior arts for these deficiencies, because it would require improper hindsight reconstruction.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BEHNOUSH HAGHIGHIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7558. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 7:00am-15:00pm.
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 D 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.
/BEHNOUSH HAGHIGHIAN/
Examiner
Art Unit 3745
/COURTNEY D HEINLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
