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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3 – 6 and 8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1 and 8 recite the limitation "said mounting" in Line 5 of both claims. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3 – 6 are rejected, as they depend on Claim 1.
Drawings
The drawings and the specification are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include any reference signs. 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the reference signs 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 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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldswain et al. (U.S. PG Pub # 20200110109) in view of Nord (U.S. Patent # 6003872).
Regarding Claim 1, Goldswain discloses a gasket (gasket with seal 22 and collar 48, figs, 2 and 4) comprising: a substantially annular core (core of gasket) having an inner circumferential face, and an outer circumferential face (inner and outer faces of 22 with 48), a mounting groove being formed into said outer circumferential face ( mounting groove on the outer circumferential face of 22, fig 2, mounting groove between 46 and 46, fig 4); and
a sensor element disposed within said mounting groove (sensor 44 within the mounting groove between 46 and 46, fig 4).
Goldswain does not disclose said sensor element configured to directly monitor compression applied to said core.
However, Nord teaches said sensor element configured to directly monitor compression applied to said core (Col 5 Lines 18 – 28 : Said seal 19 consequently represents a seal designed as an independent switching or measuring device, on which the electric signals can be picked up for further interpretation and processing, whereby the stresses or deformations occurring in the seal, or the processes of motion of the pulse generator 21 occurring on the seal, can be detected by the sensors 20, 20' in any desired combination, and corresponding electric signals can be converted within the sensors 20, 20', which signals can be simultaneously picked up and interpreted on the sensors as measuring signals having different mechanisms of excitation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to replace the sensors of Goldswain with that of Nord with a reasonable expectation of success so that the sensors can measure the stresses or deformation occurring in the core of the gasket ( Nord Col 5 Lines 18 – 28).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Goldswain and Nord discloses the gasket wherein said sensor element comprises at least one sensor (Goldswain 44) and at least one mounting strip, wherein said at least one sensor is coupled to said at least one mounting strip (Goldswain Para 0115 – mounting strip with weld, solder connection as the weld or solder connection can be used to couple 44 to the rotor).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Goldswain and Nord discloses the gasket wherein said mounting strip is composed of a conductive material (Goldswain Para 0113 – weld or solder has metallic material that is conductive).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Goldswain and Nord discloses the gasket wherein said sensor element is further configured for wireless transmission of sensor data (Goldswain Para 0127 - connectors 70 configured to be wireless).
Regarding Claim 8, Goldswain discloses a gasket (gasket with seal 22 and collar 48, figs 2 and 4) comprising:
a substantially annular core ( core of gasket) having an inner circumferential face and an outer circumferential face (inner and outer faces of 22 with 48), a mounting groove being formed into said outer circumferential face (mounting groove on the outer circumferential face of 22, fig 2, mounting groove between 46 and 46, fig 4); and
a sensor element disposed within said mounting ( sensor 44 within the mounting groove between 46 and 46, fig 4).
Goldswain does not disclose said sensor element configured to directly monitor compression applied to said core, wherein said sensor element is further configured to remain substantially stationary during monitoring of said compression applied to said core.
However, Nord teaches said sensor element (20, 20’, fig 4) configured to directly monitor compression applied to said core (Col 5 Lines 18 – 28 : Said seal 19 consequently represents a seal designed as an independent switching or measuring device, on which the electric signals can be picked up for further interpretation and processing, whereby the stresses or deformations occurring in the seal, can be detected by the sensors 20, 20' in any desired combination, and corresponding electric signals can be converted within the sensors 20, 20', which signals can be simultaneously picked up and interpreted on the sensors as measuring signals having different mechanisms of excitation), wherein said sensor element (20, 20’, fig 4) is further configured to remain substantially stationary during monitoring of said compression applied to said core (20, 20’ configured to remain substantially stationary during monitoring of said compression applied to said core, as sensors 20, 20’ are stationary to the seal 19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to replace the sensors of Goldswain with that of Nord with a reasonable expectation of success so that the sensors can measure the stresses or deformation occurring in the core of the gasket ( Nord Col 5 Lines 18 – 28).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldswain in view of Nord and in further view of Owen (U.S. Paten # 5794946).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Goldswain and Nord discloses the gasket.
The combination of Goldswain and Nord does not disclose further comprising an outer guide ring positioned radially outward relative said outer circumferential face.
However, Owen teaches further comprising an outer guide ring (14, fig 2) positioned radially outward relative said outer circumferential face (14 outside the outer face of 10, fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the outer guide ring of Owen with the gasket of Goldswain with a reasonable expectation of success as the guide ring limits compression and locates the gasket between the pipe flanges (Owen Col 2 Lines 53 – 55).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to L. Susmitha Koneru whose telephone number is 571.270.5333. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday-Friday, 9:00 AM-4:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christine Mills can be reached on 571.272.8322. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571.273.8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/L. SUSMITHA KONERU/Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights