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, see page 2, filed 12/31/2021, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 8, and 10 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further careful consideration, new grounds of rejection are made.
Specifically, Applicant argues on page 2 that because Goodwin’s flexible beam and border element are etched using standard MES technology that the two must be made from the same material, and thus since the cantilever is “vibratable”, i.e. capable of being vibrated, it cannot read on the “non-vibratory” limitation. However, more careful scrutiny of the instant specification reveals that this appears to be the same technology and configuration of the instant application, that the paddle and the border are integral and monolithic and therefore the border must also be “capable” of being vibrated, thus contradicting the term “non-vibratory” as it appears to be intended to be used by Applicant. In fact, this issue is not addressed in the specification at all except to discuss the border as being “affixed” the base, which the base is also not described as “non-vibratory”. Examiner notes that “affixed” is not synonymous with “non-vibratory” and thus a 112a rejection is appropriate.
Further prior art rejections are provided in light newly found art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 9-10, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 10 the claims contain the limitations “a non-vibratory base” and “the border of the body is non-vibratory” which appears to have been amended into the claims on 3/18/2024. However, these attributes are not discussed in the specification as filed. Rather, in paragraph [0044] of the PGPub that corresponds to the specification, the border and base are described as “[t]he vibratory member 300, 400 may be permanently or removably affixed to a base 502. In an embodiment, the border 312, 412 regions are secured to the base in a substantially rigid fashion. In an embodiment, portions of the base 502 sandwich the vibratory member therebetween proximate the border 312, 412, yet still allow the vibratable portion 304, 404 to vibrate. The fluid to be quantified may be introduced into, or may be passed through conduits in the base (not shown) such that the fluid under test is in contact with the vibratable portion 304, 404 of the vibratory member 300, 400”. However, “affixed” and “rigid fashion” are not necessarily synonymous with “non-vibratory”.
Claims 8 and 12-15 inherit the deficiencies of their respective base claims and are therefore likewise rejected.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 13, the limitations “the first coil” and “the second coil” lack antecedent basis. It appears this claim should depend on claim 12 which provides antecedent basis for these limitations.
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 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Djakov et al. (USPN 8,210,030; “Djakov”) in view of Gallagher (USPN 5,670,709).
Regarding claim 1, Djakov discloses in in figure 1 a planar vibratory member (3) affixed to a non-vibratory base (2) by a border thereof of (2a-2d) and operable for use in a vibrating densitometer (Examiner notes the term “operable for” is synonymous with “capable of” and is being treated as an intended use of the vibratory member. Prior art makes clear (e.g. Gallagher at col. 2, lines 6-10 and the instant specification at ¶ [0002] of the PGPub) that such vibrating fluidic transducers are used in both types of sensors) (col. 4, lines 3-19, col. 8, lines 45-49, col. 9, lines 22-49), comprising a body (3) comprising the border (2a-2d) and a vibratable portion (3a-3b), wherein the vibratable portion (3a-3b) emanates from the body (3), wherein the vibratable portion (3a-3b) comprises a cantilevered paddle, and wherein the border (2a-2d) of the body (3) is non-vibratory, and surrounds the vibratable portion (3a-3b) and wherein the vibratable portion is operable to be vibrated by a driver (col. 4, lines 3-34, col. 7, lines 14-28).
Djakov discloses a single “paddle” but contemplates several other configurations, including a series of paddles or multiple paddles arranged in an interdigitated fashion (see col 15, lines 42-53).
Djakov is silent specifically to a paddles nested within an outer paddle.
In the same field of endeavor, Gallagher teaches a transducer for measuring fluid properties such as density and the like (col. 1, lines 6-9) wherein the vibratable portion comprises a cantilvered paddle (12) nested within an outer paddle (19) (col. 1, line 65 through col 2, line 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to configure Djakov’s vibratory paddle to be in a nested configuration with an outer paddle as taught by Gallagher because such a configuration provides a higher efficiency with a smaller resonating footprint due to the nesting of the paddles as opposed to a side by side “tuning fork” configuration discussed in Gallagher (see col. 1, lines 13-52).
Regarding claim 9, Djakov discloses in in figures 1 a fluid property sensor operable to determine a density of a fluid therein (Examiner notes the term “operable for” is synonymous with “capable of” and is being treated as an intended use of the vibratory member. Prior art makes clear (e.g. Gallagher at col. 2, lines 6-10 and the instant specification at ¶ [0002] of the PGPub) that such vibrating fluidic transducers are used in both types of sensors) (col. 4, lines 3-19, col. 8, lines 45-49, col. 9, lines 22-49), comprising a driver (4) (col. 7, lines 15-28), a planar vibratory member (3) vibratable by the driver (4) (col. 7, lines 15-28), comprising a body (3) and a vibratable portion (3a-3b) emanating from the body (3), wherein the vibratable portion (3a-3b) comprises cantilevered paddle, a non-vibratory border (2a-2d) of the body (3) surrounding the vibratable portion (3a-3b), a non-vibratory base (2) having the planar vibratory member (3) affixed thereto (col. 4, lines 3-34, col. 7, lines 14-28), at least one pickoff sensor (5a) configured to detect vibrations of the vibratory member (3) (col. 8, lines 3-26), and meter electronics comprising an interface configured to send an excitation signal to the driver (4) and to receive a vibrational response from the at least one pickoff sensor (5a), and to measure a property of the fluid therein (col. 1, line 50-col. 2, line 32).
As noted above, Djakov discloses the fluid property can be viscosity, flow rate, shear and temperature. One having ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate and infer that density is among the properties such a resonant vibratory sensor can sense as evidence by the prior art (e.g. Gallagher at col. 2, lines 6-10 and the instant specification at ¶ [0002] of the PGPub).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to utilize Djakov’s device in determining density of fluid for applications such as determining composition of downhole fluids.
Djakov discloses a single “paddle” but contemplates several other configurations, including a series of paddles or multiple paddles arranged in an interdigitated fashion (see col 15, lines 42-53).
Djakov is silent specifically to a paddles nested within an outer paddle.
In the same field of endeavor, Gallagher teaches a transducer for measuring fluid properties such as density and the like (col. 1, lines 6-9) wherein the vibratable portion comprises a cantilvered paddle (12) nested within an outer paddle (19) (col. 1, line 65 through col 2, line 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to configure Djakov’s vibratory paddle to be in a nested configuration with an outer paddle as taught by Gallagher because such a configuration provides a higher efficiency with a smaller resonating footprint due to the nesting of the paddles as opposed to a side by side “tuning fork” configuration discussed in Gallagher (see col. 1, lines 13-52).
Claims 8, 10, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Djakov in view of Gallagher and Jiang et al. (USPN 9,228,929; “Jiang”).
Regarding claim 8, Djakiv as modified by Gallagher discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Djakov discloses the vibratable portion is driven by repetitive current signals to the heater and the properties are sensed by a change in output voltage from the Wheatstone bridge (col. 7, lines 15-57).
Djakov does not explicitly disclose that the source of the excitation and pick-off signals are from a coil, however it is well known in the art to drive and sense an oscillating element using a coil.
For instance, and in the same field of endeavor, Jiang teaches a vibrating densitometer comprising a vibrating element (10) in communication with at least one coil (9) wherein the at least one coil (9) is operable to alternately act as either a driver or pickoff and controlling a timing of the excitation signal and the detection signal with a switching circuit with the meter electronics, such that the excitation signal is provided to the at least one coil by meter electronics (col. 3, line 36 through col. 4, line 25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to use a coil as the excitation and voltage sensing source as taught by Jian in Djakov’s modified sensor for the purpose of enabling faster detection times (col. 2, line 61 through col. 3, line 5).
Regarding claim 10, Djakov discloses in figure 1 a method for operating a vibratory fluidic sensor (col. 1, line 50 through col. 2, line 32), comprising the steps of providing a vibratory fluidic sensor comprising a non-vibratory base (2) (col. 4, lines 3-7) and meter electronics (col. 1, line 50-col. 2, line 32), affixing a planar vibratory member (3) to the base (2) (col. 5, line 40 through col. 6, line 26), vibrating the planar vibratory member (col. 7, lines 15-28), wherein the planar vibratory member (3) comprises a body further comprising a border (2a-2d) and a vibratable portion (3a-3b) emanating from the body, wherein the vibratable portion (3a-3b) comprises paddle (col. 4, lines 3-34, col. 7, lines 14-28), surrounding the vibratable portion (3a-3b) of the body with the border (2a-2d) (col. 5, line 40 through col. 6, line 26), wherein the border (2a-2d) (is non- vibratory (col. 5, line 40 through col. 6, line 26), receiving an excitation signal, outputting a detection signal, controlling a timing of the excitation signal, followed by meter electronics receiving a detection signal (col. 4, lines 3-34, col. 7, lines 14-28).
Djakov discloses the fluid property can be viscosity, flow rate, shear and temperature. One having ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate and infer that density is among the properties such a resonant vibratory sensor can sense as evidence by the prior art (e.g. Gallagher at col. 2, lines 6-10 and the instant specification at ¶ [0002] of the PGPub).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to utilize Djakov’s device in determining density of fluid for applications such as determining composition of downhole fluids.
Djakov discloses a single “paddle” but contemplates several other configurations, including a series of paddles or multiple paddles arranged in an interdigitated fashion (see col 15, lines 42-53).
Djakov is silent specifically to a paddles nested within an outer paddle.
In the same field of endeavor, Gallagher teaches a transducer for measuring fluid properties such as density and the like (col. 1, lines 6-9) wherein the vibratable portion comprises a cantilvered paddle (12) nested within an outer paddle (19) (col. 1, line 65 through col 2, line 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to configure Djakov’s vibratory paddle to be in a nested configuration with an outer paddle as taught by Gallagher because such a configuration provides a higher efficiency with a smaller resonating footprint due to the nesting of the paddles as opposed to a side by side “tuning fork” configuration discussed in Gallagher (see col. 1, lines 13-52).
Djakov discloses the vibratable portion is driven by repetitive current signals to the heater and the properties are sensed by a change in output voltage from the Wheatstone bridge (col. 7, lines 15-57).
Djakov does not explicitly disclose that the source of the excitation and pick-off signals are from a coil, however it is well known in the art to drive and sense an oscillating element using a coil.
For instance, and in the same field of endeavor, Jiang teaches a vibrating densitometer comprising a vibrating element (10) in communication with at least one coil (9) wherein the at least one coil (9) is operable to alternately act as either a driver or pickoff and controlling a timing of the excitation signal and the detection signal with a switching circuit with the meter electronics, such that the excitation signal is provided to the at least one coil by meter electronics (col. 3, line 36 through col. 4, line 25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to use a coil as the excitation and voltage sensing source as taught by Jian in Djakov’s modified sensor for the purpose of enabling faster detection times (col. 2, line 61 through col. 3, line 5).
Regarding claim 15, Djakov as modified by Gallagher and Jiang disclose all the limitations of claim 10 on which this claim depends.
Jiang further teaches the at least one coil (9) comprises a single coil (9), wherein the single coil is operable to receive excitation signals, drive the vibratory member, detect a signal from the vibratory member and provide detection signals (col. 3, line 36 through col. 4, line 25).
The reasons and motivation for combining are the same as recited in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Djakov, Gallagher and Jiang, and further in view of Goodbread et al. (USPN 8,291,750; “Goodbread”).
Regarding claim 14, Djakov, Gallagher and Jiang disclose all the limitations of claim 10 on which this claim depends.
Djakov, Gallagher and Jiang are silent to the step of gating the detection signal to ignore signal noise during coil excitation.
However, gating a detection signal is known in the art of resonant fluid measurement.
In the same field of endeavor, Goodbread teaches an oscillating fluid measurement method comprising the step of gating the detection signal to ignore signal noise during coil excitation (col. 5, lines 25 through col. 6, line 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to gate the detection signal in Djakov’s modified method to ignore signal noise during coil excitation as taught by Goodbread for the purpose of increase the overall signal to noise ratio for the sensor and thus increase the accuracy of the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 and 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATALIE HULS whose telephone number is (571)270-5914. The examiner can normally be reached T-F 7-4 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, Lisa Caputo can be reached on (571) 272-2388. 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.
/NATALIE HULS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2863