DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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) 1, 6, 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaerman (U.S. Patent No. 4468620) in view of Barthe (WO2013048912). Vaerman teaches an inspection system for inspecting a surface (Fig. 1 with col. 1, I. 52ff, "system for in situ checking of turbine engine blades by eddy currents"), the inspection system comprising: a macromanipulator comprising an inspection end configured to be disposed proximal to the surface (Fig. 3 (11 ), "handle"), wherein the macromanipulator is movable with respect to the surface (see fig. 3); a micromanipulator coupled to the inspection end of the micromanipulator (Fig. 1, 3 (1), "frame with col. 2, I. 38ff), the micromanipulator comprising: a housing (Fig. 1 (1 ), "frame"): a pair of guide rails at least partially disposed within and fixedly coupled to the housing (Fig. 1 (12, 13), "rods"); a probe support slidably coupled to the pair of guide rails (Fig. 1 (14, 18), "probe support" and "shoe"); an actuating arm disposed within the housing and coupled to the probe support (Fig. 1 (17), plate") via a mechanism (Fig. 1 (15), "continuous probe displacement drive"); and an actuating mechanism configured to rotate the actuating arm relative to the housing (Fig. 1 (30), "motor"), and wherein the mechanism is configured to translate the probe support in response to the rotation of the actuating arm such that the probe support slides along the pair of guide rails (see Fig. 1 with corresponding text passages); and a probe coupled to the probe support for inspecting the surface (Fig. 2 (19), "probe"). Vaerman teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for using a scotch yoke to translate the rotating movement of the actuating mechanism in a sliding movement of the probe. Barthe teaches in (Fig. 6, 7 with ¶¶[0153]-[0155], [0134]) that it was known to use scotch yoke to translate the rotating movement of the actuating mechanism in a sliding movement. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Barthe for the purpose of enabling linear movement.
Regarding claim 6, the probe is an eddy current probe. See col. 2, lines 15-18.
Regarding claim 13, Vaerman further teaches moving, via the macromanipulator, the micromanipulator relative to the surface at a plurality of inspection regions on the surface; translating, via the actuating mechanism, the probe relative to the housing of the micromanipulator at each of the plurality of inspection regions; and inspecting, via the probe, the surface while the probe is moving relative to the housing of the micromanipulator at each of the plurality of inspection regions. See col. 3, lines 21-45.
Regarding claim 17, the probe is an eddy current probe. See col. 2, lines 15-18.
Regarding claim 11, the housing has a circular cross section (see curvature at 1 and/or 8 in fig. 1). Vaerman as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for a diameter of the housing is less than 50 millimetres. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize a housing of less than 50 mm for the purpose of using an optimum value for what is being measured. The applicant should note that it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 12, Vaerman as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for the micromanipulator is removably coupled to the macromanipulator. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed micromanipulator is removably coupled to the macromanipulator for the purpose of maintenance and cleaning. The applicant should note that it has been held to be within the scope of one of ordinary skill in the art to make two items separable. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961).
Claim(s) 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaerman (U.S. Patent No. 4468620) in view of Barthe (WO2013048912) and further in view of Van der Veer (U.S. Patent No. 5291136). Vaerman as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for an extension arm extending from the probe support such that the probe is distal to the housing. Van der Veer teaches a robotic sensor arm extending from the probe support such that the probe is distal to the housing. The applicant is directed to review figs. 1 and 5. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Van der Veer for the purpose of automatic and/or remote handling of inspection.
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaerman (U.S. Patent No. 4468620) in view of Barthe (WO2013048912) and further in view of Fetzer (U.S. Publication No. 20200232951). Vaerman as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for recording coordinates of the micromanipulator at each of the plurality of inspection regions. Fetzer teaches in ¶33 that it was known to record coordinates of the micromanipulator as well as defect tracking. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Fetzer for the purpose of quickly locating defects.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 7, 9-10, 14-16 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tsuji (U.S. Publication No. 20230367015) teaches recording location information and mapping defect locations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E MAHONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-2122. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER E MAHONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights