Ex Parte Daniel

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Oct 13, 2017

13440623 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 13, 2017)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O.Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
13/440,623 04/05/2012 Joseph A. Daniel 201990.05834 9178
64956 7590 10/17/2017
HAHN LOESER / LINCOLN
200 Public Square, Suite 2800
Cleveland, OH 44114
EXAMINER
NORTON, JOHN J
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3742
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
10/17/2017 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
patents@hahnlaw.com
ip @ lincolnelectrie .com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte JOSEPH A. DANIEL
Appeal 2016-000134
Application 13/440,623
Technology Center 3700
Before MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD, ANTON W. FETTING, and
ALYSSA A.FINAMORE, Administrative Patent Judges.
FETTING, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE1
Joseph A. Daniel (Appellant) seeks review under 35 U.S.C. § 134 of a
Final Rejection of claims 1, 3—11, and 13—20, the only claims pending in the
application on appeal. We have jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
1 Our decision will make reference to the Appellant’s Appeal Brief (“App.
Br.,” filed Apr. 6, 2015) and Reply Brief (“Reply Br.,” filed Aug. 5, 2015),
and the Examiner’s Answer (“Ans.,” mailed July 30, 2015), and Final
Action (“Final Act.,” mailed Dec. 18, 2014).
Appeal 2016-000134
Application 13/440,623
The Appellant invented a form of necking detection of weld beads for
welding processes involving surface tension transfer short circuit welding.
Specification para. 1.
An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of
exemplary claim 1, which is reproduced below (bracketed matter and some
paragraphing added).
1. A process
for dynamically adjusting a threshold value
for detecting the end of a short circuit condition
during a welding operation
comprising the steps of:
[1] monitoring at least one welding parameter
associated with detecting said short circuit condition
in a short circuit transfer welding process;
[2] comparing
said at least one welding parameter
to
a threshold value for said at least one welding parameter;
[3] adjusting a value
of said threshold value for detecting said short circuit
condition
based on said step of comparing;
and
[4] using said adjusted value
as a new threshold value
for a next cycle of said waveform [sic, no waveform
antecedent]
for detecting said short circuit condition
2
Appeal 2016-000134
Application 13/440,623
The Examiner relies upon the following prior art:
Hsu US 6,717,108 B2 Apr. 6,2004
Hutchison US 2004/0188404 A1 Sept. 30, 2004
Wikipedia, PID Controller, http://web.archive.org/web/
20100220050116/http ://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/PID_controller
Claims 1,3,7, and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Hutchison.
Claims 9-11, 13, and 17—20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Hutchison.
Claims 4, 5, 14, and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Hutchison and Wikipedia.
Claims 6 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Hutchison and Hsu.
ISSUES
The issues of anticipation and obviousness turn primarily on whether
Hutchison is encompassed within the scope of the independent claims as
drafted.
FACTS PERTINENT TO THE ISSUES
The following enumerated Findings of Fact (FF) are believed to be
supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
3
Appeal 2016-000134
Application 13/440,623
Facts Related to the Prior Art — Hutchison
01. Hutchison is directed to short circuit welding. Hutchison para.
1.
02. Short circuit transfer welding generally consists of alternating
between an arc state and a short circuit, non—arc state. During the
arc state the wire melts, and during the short circuit state the metal
further melts and the molten metal is transferred from the end of
the wire to the weld puddle. The metal transferred in one cycle is
referred to as a drop, regardless of the size or shape of the portion
of metal that is transferred. Hutchison para. 2.
03. Hutchison describes the short circuit transfer welding process
as cyclical. One cycle of the process begins with the beginning of
a steady state arc, followed by a short circuit condition, and is
completed with the beginning of another steady state arc
condition. A typical cycle length is 10 msec. The electrode, and a
portion of the base metal, are melted during the short circuit
transfer welding process by current flowing through the electrode
to the weldment. Generally, a portion of the wire material melts
during the arc condition, and is transferred during the short
condition. Hutchison para. 27.
04. Hutchison describes arc voltage feedback being used to
determine if the desired arc length is present and to adjust the
long-term command on a short—by—short basis. The short—by-
short current command is derived from real-time arc current and
voltage feedback (rather than power) and is used to control the
4
Appeal 2016-000134
Application 13/440,623
bum—off rate by an instantaneous, or short—by—short, adjustment
of the current command. The preferred control scheme also uses a
function of the time derivative of arc power (less the time
derivative of arc current) to detect, in real time, when the short is
about to clear. Hutchison para. 30.
05. Hutchison describes the wire bum—off rate being controlled by
controlling the current on a short circuit—by—short circuit basis (or
period—by—period basis). This short—by—short current control is
combined with the current control set by arc voltage (to obtain a
desired arc length). The power source and controller of the
preferred embodiment are sufficiently fast to provide the desired
current in much less than one weld cycle. Thus, two control loops
are in simultaneous use—an arc length loop using arc voltage as
feedback to set a long-term current command, and a wire bum—off
loop using arc current and voltage as feedback to set a short—by-
short command. The two loops are weighted differently. Both arc
voltage and arc current are used to detect, in real time, the short-
clearing, and to terminate the process. Hutchison paras. 32—33.
06. Hutchison describes a background current flowing during an arc
phase. When a short circuit is established, the current is
commanded to a higher level along a rapidly increasing segment.
The rapidly increasing segment is followed by a plateau, which is
followed be a more slowly increasing segment. When the short is
about to clear the current is quickly lowered to a background
level. After the arc is established the current is commanded to a
high level. The high current level during the arc phase is ended by
5
Appeal 2016-000134
Application 13/440,623
decreasing the current as fast as possible to a plateau, and then
after the plateau more gradually decreasing the current to the
background level. Hutchison para. 34.
07. Hutchison describes the point at which the rapidly increasing
segment ends as being adjusted due to past history of the process
or welding cycle history. Welding cycle history, as used herein,
includes parameters of past welding cycles, including functions
thereof. More specifically, the time from when the indication of
the short clearing (dp/dt as set forth below) is received, until the
short clears (precursor time) can be monitored. A running average
can be used to end the rapidly increasing segment earlier or later.
Also, it can be ended earlier when a prior short (or shorts) cleared
before the current could be lowered. The end of the segment can
be based on time, current, voltage, power, or functions thereof
crossing a threshold. Also, the overall process can be controlled
using precursor time as one of the feedback parameters.
Hutchison para. 35.
08. Hutchison describes it being desirable to reduce the current
prior to the short clearing. Hutchison uses more information than
can be obtained from the voltage waveform alone to quickly and
consistently detect the imminent short clearing. More specifically,
the controller uses the second derivative of the power to detect the
short clearing event, in real time. The controller solves an
equation Vc=d/dt(dP/dt), in real time. When Vc crosses Vthreshoid
the controller determines, in real time, that the short is about to
clear. Alternatives includes using other functions of dP/dt, using
6
Appeal 2016-000134
Application 13/440,623
functions of dVc/dt instead of or with dP/dt, as well as using
dR/dt, or higher order derivatives of these parameters, or other
functions of these parameters, and combinations thereof.
Hutchison para. 36.
09. According to another alternative Vthreshoid is varied in response
to past history of the process. For example, in one embodiment, a
running average of the time between the crossing the Vthreshoid and
the actual short clearing for a number of weld cycles is calculated
and used to adjust Vthreshoid- Hutchison para. 37.
ANALYSIS
We are not persuaded by Appellant’s argument that the claims update a
threshold value on a cycle by cycle basis. App. Br. 12—16. Appellant agrees
that apart from this, Hutchison anticipates claim 1. Id. at 16. Appellant’s
arguments are distilled as
the Office argues that claim 1 seems to claim only one weld
cycle rather than repeated weld cycles using new information
each time. This interpretation of the claim language is incorrect.
The final element of claim 1 reads: “using said adjusted value
as a new threshold value for a next cycle of said waveform for
detecting said short circuit condition.” This statement explicitly
claims the process of using the new adjusted value as a new
threshold value in a next cycle of waveform. This claims not
only a single cycle, but the process of making a threshold value
adjustment in the next cycle as well.
Id. Although Appellant is correct that this recites “making a threshold value
adjustment in the next cycle,” the claim is silent as to the duration of what
7
Appeal 2016-000134
Application 13/440,623
transpires before that. There is quite literally only one transition to another
cycle recited in claim 1.
We are not persuaded by Appellant’s argument that it is impossible to
run just one sequence of a repetitive cycle and accomplish anything. Reply
Br. 7. Appellant conflates the scope of the claim with the scope of the
context. Appellant chooses to recite a single adjustment in their claims,
rather than draft the claims to require plural cycles within their scope. The
claims are thus directed to a single set of circumstances within the broader
context. We find Appellant’s argument that Hutchison fails to describe
monitoring “n” cycles (id.) unpersuasive for similar reasons.
Appellant’s arguments in support of claim 11 repeat the arguments in
support of claim 1. The remaining claims are argued on the basis of their
parent claims.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The rejection of claims 1, 3, 7, and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Hutchison is proper.
The rejection of claims 9—11, 13, and 17—20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Hutchison is proper.
The rejection of claims 4, 5, 14, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Hutchison and Wikipedia is proper.
The rejection of claims 6 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Hutchison and Hsu is proper.
8
Appeal 2016-000134
Application 13/440,623
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1, 3—11, and 13—20 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this
appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(l)(iv) (2011).
AFFIRMED
9