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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/2/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5 appears to have a typographical error in line 5. The examiner respectfully suggests restoring “the” to the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a signal-processing analysis unit configured to … determine whether the target gas is present … and determine a concentration of the target gas in claim 1 and described in paragraph [0010]; and
a signal-processing analysis unit configured to … determine whether the target gas is present … and determine a concentration of the target gas in claim 13 and described in paragraph [0010].
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 20 recites that in the monitoring mode, the analysis unit is configured to determine whether an indicator of the presence of the target gas is present or not as a function of the second detection variable. However, this limitation (although slightly reworded) already appears in parent claim 13. Therefore, claim 20 does not further limit parent claim 13. Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12-14, 17, 18 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0226505 by Willett et al. (“Willett”) in view of U.S. Patent 5,902,556 issued to Van De Vyver et al. (“Van De Vyver”) and U.S. Patent 10,288,575 issued to Ali et al. (“Ali”).
As for claims 1 and 12, Willett discloses a gas detection device for monitoring an area for a combustible target gas to be detected, the gas detection device comprising:
a housing (paragraph [0042]) with an interior and an opening, the opening configured to establish a fluid connection between the interior of the housing and the area (paragraph [0042]);
a detector (2) arranged in the housing (paragraphs [0042] and [0069]), the detector comprising: an electrically conductive wire with a helical heating segment (paragraph [0003]); electrical insulation around the heating segment (paragraph [0003]); and a catalytic material provided at least one of in and on the electrical insulation (paragraph [0003]), the electrical insulation having a shape of one of a sphere (paragraph [0003]) and an ellipsoid, wherein the detector is configured to oxidize a combustible target gas located in the interior of the housing by heating the heating segment (paragraph [0003]);
a compensator (4) arranged in the housing (paragraphs [0042] and [0069]);
a sensor array (Fig. 1; paragraphs [0070] and [0075]); and
a signal-processing analysis unit (9) connected to the sensor array,
wherein the gas detection device is configured to apply an electrical voltage (VS) to the detector such that an electric current flows through the wire of the detector and heats the heating segment of the wire (See Fig. 1 and paragraph [0074]); and to apply an electrical voltage to the compensator such that an electric current flows through the compensator and heats the compensator (see Fig. 1) and
wherein the sensor array is configured to measure a first detection variable, which depends on a temperature of the detector (paragraph [0075]), and a second detection variable, which depends on a temperature of the compensator (paragraph [0075]) or to measure a third detection variable, which depends both on the temperature of the detector and on the temperature of the compensator;
wherein the signal-processing analysis unit (9) is configured to at least one of:
determine whether the target gas is present in the area to be monitored or not as a function of at least one of:
the first detection variable (paragraph [0075]),
the second detection variable (paragraph [0075]);
the third detection variable; and
the first detection variable and the second detection variable (paragraph [0075]); and
determine a concentration of the target gas in the area to be monitored as a function of at least one of:
the first detection variable (paragraph [0075]),
the second detection variable (paragraph [0075]);
the third detection variable; and
the first detection variable and the second detection variable (paragraph [0075]).
Willett does not disclose that the compensator extends in a plane and comprises an electrical strip and a protective layer as recited. Willett discloses that the detector and the compensator may be of different types (paragraphs [0004] and [0072]).
However, Van De Vyver discloses a compensator (Fig. 1 and claims 6 and 8) extending in a plane (see Fig. 1) and comprising: an electrical strip conductor (16/70) with a heating segment (20/70) and a carrier plate (12), in which plate the strip conductor is embedded or onto which the strip conductor is applied (Fig. 1), the compensator comprising a protective layer (80; col. 8, lines 19-22 and col. 8, lines 34-37) over the strip conductor (see Fig. 6J), wherein the protective layer (80) protects the strip conductor from coming into contact with a gas from the environment (because 80 surrounds 70, see Fig. 6J). Van De Vyver discloses that a compensator created by photolithography onto a substrate decreases power consumption (col. 1, lines 24-40).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the compensator of Willett to extend in a plane and comprise an electrical strip as disclosed by Van De Vyver in order to decrease power consumption (Van De Vyver: col. 1, lines 24-40).
Willett as modified by Van De Vyver does not explicitly disclose that:
the gas detection device is configured to be selectively operated in a monitoring mode or operated in a measuring mode as recited.
However, Ali discloses a gas detection device that is configured to be selectively operated in a monitoring mode (low power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45) or in a measuring mode (high power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45);
the gas detection device is configured to apply electrical voltage to a detector such that an energy consumption of the detector is higher during the operation of the gas detection device in the measuring mode than during the operation in the monitoring mode (col. 1, lines 32-45);
the gas detection device is configured to switch over from the monitoring mode into the measuring mode (col. 1, lines 32-45) when an analysis unit has detected an indicator (a high concentration; col. 1, lines 32-45).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the gas detection device of Willett and Van De Vyver to operate in a monitoring mode and a measuring mode as disclosed by Ali in order to reduce power consumption (Ali: col. 1, lines 32-45).
Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that:
in the monitoring mode (Ali: low power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the sensor array is configured to measure the second detection variable (Willett: paragraph [0075]);
in the monitoring mode (Ali: low power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the analysis unit (Willett: 9) is configured to determine, as a function of the second detection variable (Willett: paragraph [0075]), whether an indicator of the presence of the target gas is present or not (Willett: paragraph [0075]; the indicator is a high value for the concentration; and Ali: col. 3, lines 30-36);
in the monitoring mode (Ali: low power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the analysis unit (Willett: 9) is configured to determine whether the indicator of the presence of the target gas is present or not (Willett: paragraph [0075]; the indicator is a high value for the concentration; and Ali: col. 3, lines 30-36); and
in the measuring mode (Ali: high power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the analysis unit (Willett: 9) is configured to determine the concentration of the gas (Willett: paragraph [0075]);
As for claim 12, Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses a gas detection device (see above) that performs the claimed process. Regarding the second-to-last limitation (i.e. “wherein, if the analysis has detected the indicator, the gas detection device is configured to switch over from the monitoring mode into the measuring mode”), the examiner notes that this limitation is contingent and is not required.
As for claims 4 and 17, Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that:
the gas detection device is configured to apply the electrical voltage to the compensator as electrical pulses (Willett: paragraphs [0086] and [0087]);
the electrical pulses applied to the compensator having a first pulse duration (Willett: paragraphs [0086] and [0087]).
As for claims 5 and 18, Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that:
the gas detection device is configured to apply the electrical voltage to the detector as electrical pulses with a second pulse duration (Willett: paragraphs [0086] and [0087]);
wherein second pulse duration is longer than the first pulse duration (Willett: paragraphs [0086] and [0087], in the case where the pulse for detection is shown in Fig. 3a and the pulse for compensation is shown in Fig. 3b).
As for claim 8, Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that the gas detection device is configured:
to apply the electrical voltage to the detector in the monitoring mode as electrical pulses with a first pulse rate (Ali: col. 1, lines 32-45);
to apply the electrical voltage to the detector in the measuring mode as electrical pulses with a second pulse rate (Ali: col. 1, lines 32-45) or to apply the electrical voltage to the detector in the measuring mode continuously; and
the second pulse rate is greater than the first pulse rate (Ali: col.1 lines 32-45).
As for claim 9, Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that:
the detector (Willett: 2) has a controllable electrical variable (Willett: resistance or current; paragraphs [0072] and [0073]), which correlates with the temperature of the detector when an electrical voltage is applied thereto;
the compensator (Willet: 4) has a controllable electrical variable (Willett: resistance or current; paragraphs [0072] and [0073]), which correlates with the temperature of the compensator when an electrical voltage is applied thereto;
the gas detection device is configured to carry out a closed-loop control (Willett: constant current or temperature: paragraphs [0072]-[0074]) with a control gain (i.e. a target current for constant current control or constant temperature control) that the controllable electrical variable for the detector follows a first predefined time course (Willett: constant current or temperature during the measurement time; paragraph [0072]) and the controllable electrical variable for the compensator follows a second predefined time course (Willett: constant current or temperature during the measurement time; paragraph [0072]).
As for claim 13, Willett discloses a gas detection device for monitoring an area for a combustible target gas to be detected, the gas detection device comprising:
a housing (paragraph [0042]) with an interior and an opening, the opening configured to establish a fluid connection between an interior of the housing and the area (paragraph [0042]);
a detector (2) arranged in the housing (paragraphs [0042] and [0069]), the detector comprising: an electrically conductive wire with a helical heating segment (paragraph [0003]); electrical insulation around the heating segment (paragraph [0003]); and a catalytic material provided at least one of in and on the electrical insulation (paragraph [0003]), the electrical insulation having a shape of one of a sphere and an ellipsoid (paragraph [0003]), wherein the detector is configured to oxidize a combustible target gas located in the interior of the housing by heating the heating segment (paragraph [0003]);
a compensator (4) arranged in the housing (paragraphs [0042] and [0069]),
a sensor array (Fig. 1; paragraphs [0070] and [0075]),
a voltage source (7) configured to apply an electrical voltage (VS) to the detector such that an electric current flows through the wire of the detector and heats the heating segment of the wire (See Fig. 1 and paragraph [0074]); and the voltage source (7) being configured to apply an electrical voltage to the compensator such that an electric current flows through the compensator and heats the compensator (see Fig. 1) and wherein the sensor array is configured to measure a first detection variable, which depends on a temperature of the detector (paragraph [0075]), and a second detection variable, which depends on a temperature of the compensator (paragraph [0075]) or to measure a third detection variable, which depends both on the temperature of the detector and on the temperature of the compensator; and
a signal-processing analysis unit (9) connected to the sensor array and configured to at least one of:
determine whether the target gas is present in the area to be monitored or not as a function of at least one of the first detection variable, the second detection variable and the third detection variable (paragraph [0075]), and
determine a concentration of the target gas in the area to be monitored as a function of the at least one of the first detection variable, the second detection variable and the third detection variable.
Willett does not disclose that the compensator extends in a plane and comprises an electrical strip and a protective layer as recited. Willett discloses that the detector and the compensator may be of different types (paragraphs [0004] and [0072]).
However, Van De Vyver discloses a compensator (Fig. 1 and claims 6 and 8) extending in a plane (see Fig. 1) and comprising: an electrical strip conductor (16) with a heating segment (20) and a carrier plate (12), in which plate the strip conductor is embedded or onto which the strip conductor is applied (Fig. 1), the compensator comprising a protective layer (80; col. 8, lines 19-22 and col. 8, lines 34-37) over the strip conductor (see Fig. 6J), wherein the protective layer (80) protects the strip conductor from coming into contact with a gas from the environment (because 80 surrounds 70, see Fig. 6J). Van De Vyver discloses that a compensator created by photolithography onto a substrate decreases power consumption (col. 1, lines 24-40).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the compensator of Willett to extend in a plane and comprise an electrical strip as disclosed by Van De Vyver in order to decrease power consumption (Van De Vyver: col. 1, lines 24-40).
Willett as modified by Van De Vyver does not explicitly disclose that:
the gas detection device is configured to be selectively operated in a monitoring mode or operated in a measuring mode as recited.
However, Ali discloses a gas detection device that is configured to be selectively operated in a monitoring mode (low power mode col. 1, lines 32-45) or in a measuring mode (high power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45);
the gas detection device is configured to apply electrical voltage to a detector such that an energy consumption of the detector is higher during the operation of the gas detection device in the measuring mode than during the operation in the monitoring mode (col. 1, lines 32-45);
the gas detection device is configured to switch over from the monitoring mode into the measuring mode (col. 1, lines 32-45) when the analysis unit has detected an indicator (a high concentration).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the gas detection device of Willett and Van De Vyver to operate in a monitoring mode and a measuring mode as disclosed by Ali in order to reduce power consumption (Ali: col. 1, lines 32-45).
Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that:
in the monitoring mode (Ali: low power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the sensor array is configured to measure the second detection variable (Willett: paragraph [0075] and Ali: col. 3, lines 30-36);
in the monitoring mode (Ali: lower power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the analysis unit (Willett: 9) is configured to determine, as a function of the second detection variable (Willett: paragraph [0075]), whether an indicator of the presence of the target gas is present or not (Willett: paragraph [0075]; the indicator is a high value for the concentration; and Ali: col. 3, lines 30-36); and
in the measuring mode (Ali: high power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the analysis unit (Willett: 9) is configured to determine the concentration of the gas (Willett: paragraph [0075]).
As for claim 14, Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that the compensator is configured to not oxidize the combustible target gas (Willett: paragraph [0004]).
As for claim 20, Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that in the monitoring mode (Ali: col. 1, lines 32-45), the analysis unit (Willett: 9) is configured to determine whether an indicator of the presence of the target gas is present or not (Willett: paragraph [0075]) as a function of the second detection variable (Willett: paragraph [0075]; the indicator is a high value for the concentration; and Ali: col. 3, lines 30-36).
As for claims 21 and 22, Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that the protective layer (Van De Vyver: 80) extends from a first edge (Van De Vyver: left edge of 80; since the protective layer is part of the compensator (see claim 1), an edge of the protective layer is one of the edges of the compensator) of the compensator to a second edge (Van De Vyver: right edge of 80; since the protective layer is part of the compensator (see claim 1), an edge of the protective layer is one of the edges of the compensator) of the compensator, the first edge being parallel to the second edge (Van De Vyver: see Figs. 6J, 6K).
Claims 2, 3, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0226505 by Willett et al. (“Willett”) in view of U.S. Patent 5,902,556 issued to Van De Vyver et al. (“Van De Vyver”) and U.S. Patent 10,288,575 issued to Ali et al. (“Ali”) as applied to claim 1, further in view of KR 100806876 by Song (“Song”).
As for claims 2 and 15, Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses a gas detection device in accordance with claims 1 and 13 (see the rejection of claims 1 and 13 above).
Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali does not explicitly disclose that the gas detection device is configured:
such that the helical heating segment of the detector wire is heated to at least 300°C; and
such that the heating segment of the strip conductor is heated to a maximum temperature which deviates from the maximum temperature of the heating segment of the detector wire by at most 200°C.
However, Song disclose a gas detection device is that configured:
such that a helical heating segment of a detector wire is heated to at least 300°C (400 ºC; see the paragraph beginning “9 and 10 illustrate …”); and
such that a heating segment of a compensator is heated to a maximum temperature which deviates from the maximum temperature of the heating segment of the detector wire by at most 200°C (the compensator is also heated to 400º C; see the paragraph beginning “9 and 10 illustrate …”).
Song and the Willett-Van De Vyver-Ali combination included each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the temperature configuration of the detector and compensator of Song with the detector and compensator of the Willett-Van De Vyver-Ali combination by heating the detector and compensator of the Willett-Van De Vyver-Ali combination to the temperature disclosed by Song, and that in combination, the temperature configuration of Song and the detector and compensator of the Willett-Van De Vyver-Ali combination merely perform the same function as each does separately. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the gas detection device to heat the detector and compensator of the Willett-Van De Vyver-Ali combination to the temperature as disclosed by Song in order to achieve the predictable result of providing a temperature at which a target gas can be detected.
As for claims 3 and 16, Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali discloses a gas detection device in accordance with claims 1 and 13 (see the rejection of claims 1 and 13 above).
Willett as modified by Van De Vyver and Ali does not explicitly disclose that the heating segment is heated as recited.
However, Song discloses a compensator that is heated to a maximum temperature which is above the ambient temperature by at least 100°(the compensator is also heated to 400º C; see the paragraph beginning “9 and 10 illustrate …”).
Song and the Willett-Van De Vyver-Ali combination included each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the temperature configuration of the compensator of Song with the compensator of the Willett-Van De Vyver-Ali combination by heating the compensator of the Willett-Van De Vyver-Ali combination to the temperature disclosed by Song, and that in combination, the temperature configuration of Song and the compensator of the Willett-Van De Vyver-Ali combination merely perform the same function as each does separately. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the gas detection device to heat the compensator of the Willett-Van De Vyver-Ali combination to the temperature as disclosed by Song in order to achieve the predictable result of providing a temperature at which a target gas can be detected.
Claims 1 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0274868 by Brown (“Brown”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0226505 by Willett et al. (“Willett”), U.S. Patent 5,902,556 issued to Van De Vyver et al. (“Van De Vyver”) and U.S. Patent 10,288,575 issued to Ali et al. (“Ali”).
As for claims 1 and 12, Brown discloses a gas detection device for monitoring an area for a combustible target gas to be detected, the gas detection device comprising:
a housing (see Fig. 1) with an interior and an opening, the opening configured to establish a fluid connection between the interior of the housing and the area (see Fig. 1);
a detector (7) arranged in the housing (see Fig. 1), the detector comprising: an electrically conductive wire (5/12) with a helical heating segment (see Fig. 2); electrical insulation (14) around the heating segment (paragraph [0003]); and a catalytic material provided at least one of in and on the electrical insulation (paragraph [0015]), the electrical insulation having a shape of one of a sphere and an ellipsoid (Fig. 2), wherein the detector is configured to oxidize a combustible target gas located in the interior of the housing by heating the heating segment (paragraph [0017]);
a compensator (8) arranged in the housing (see Fig. 1);
a sensor array (26, 30),
wherein the gas detection device is configured to apply an electrical voltage (at 28) to the detector (7) such that an electric current flows through the wire of the detector and heats the heating segment of the wire (See Fig. 1); and to apply an electrical voltage to the compensator (8) such that an electric current flows through the compensator and heats the compensator (see Fig. 1); and
wherein the sensor array (26, 30) is configured to measure a first detection variable, which depends on a temperature of the detector (paragraph [0017]), and a second detection variable, which depends on a temperature of the compensator (paragraph [0017]) or to measure a third detection variable, which depends both on the temperature of the detector and on the temperature of the compensator.
Brown does not disclose a signal-processing analysis unit as recited.
However, Willett discloses a signal-processing analysis unit (9) connected to a sensor array,
wherein the signal-processing analysis unit (9) is configured to at least one of:
determine whether the target gas is present in the area to be monitored or not as a function of at least one of:
the first detection variable (paragraph [0075]),
the second detection variable (paragraph [0075]);
the third detection variable; and
the first detection variable and the second detection variable (paragraph [0075]); and
determine a concentration of the target gas in the area to be monitored as a function of at least one of:
the first detection variable (paragraph [0075]),
the second detection variable (paragraph [0075]);
the third detection variable; and
the first detection variable and the second detection variable (paragraph [0075]).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the gas detection device of Brown to include the signal-processing analysis unit as disclosed by Willett in order to automatically process the output of the detectors of Brown and to provide a reading to the user (Willett: paragraph [0072]).
Brown as modified by Willett does not disclose that the compensator extends in a plane and comprises an electrical strip and a protective layer as recited. Willett discloses that a detector and a compensator may be of different types (paragraphs [0004] and [0072]).
However, Van De Vyver discloses a compensator (Fig. 1 and claims 6 and 8) extending in a plane (see Fig. 1) and comprising: an electrical strip conductor (16/70) with a heating segment (20/70) and a carrier plate (12), in which plate the strip conductor is embedded or onto which the strip conductor is applied (Fig. 1), the compensator comprising a protective layer (80; col. 8, lines 19-22 and col. 8, lines 34-37) over the strip conductor (see Fig. 6J), wherein the protective layer (80) protects the strip conductor from coming into contact with a gas from the environment (because 80 surrounds 70, see Fig. 6J). Van De Vyver discloses that a compensator created by photolithography onto a substrate decreases power consumption (col. 1, lines 24-40).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the compensator of Brown and Willett to extend in a plane and comprise an electrical strip as disclosed by Van De Vyver in order to decrease power consumption (Van De Vyver: col. 1, lines 24-40).
Brown as modified by Willett and Van De Vyver does not explicitly disclose that:
the gas detection device is configured to be selectively operated in a monitoring mode or operated in a measuring mode as recited.
However, Ali discloses a gas detection device that is configured to be selectively operated in a monitoring mode (low power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45) or in a measuring mode (high power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45);
the gas detection device is configured to apply electrical voltage to a detector such that an energy consumption of the detector is higher during the operation of the gas detection device in the measuring mode than during the operation in the monitoring mode (col. 1, lines 32-45);
the gas detection device is configured to switch over from the monitoring mode into the measuring mode (col. 1, lines 32-45) when an analysis unit has detected an indicator (a high concentration; col. 1, lines 32-45).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the gas detection device of Brown, Willett and Van De Vyver to operate in a monitoring mode and a measuring mode as disclosed by Ali in order to reduce power consumption (Ali: col. 1, lines 32-45).
Brown as modified by Willett, Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that:
in the monitoring mode (Ali: low power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the sensor array is configured to measure the second detection variable (Willett: paragraph [0075]);
in the monitoring mode (Ali: low power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the analysis unit (Willett: 9) is configured to determine, as a function of the second detection variable (Willett: paragraph [0075]), whether an indicator of the presence of the target gas is present or not (Willett: paragraph [0075]; the indicator is a high value for the concentration; and Ali: col. 3, lines 30-36);
in the monitoring mode (Ali: low power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the analysis unit (Willett: 9) is configured to determine whether the indicator of the presence of the target gas is present or not (Willett: paragraph [0075]; the indicator is a high value for the concentration; and Ali: col. 3, lines 30-36); and
in the measuring mode (Ali: high power mode; col. 1, lines 32-45), the analysis unit (Willett: 9) is configured to determine the concentration of the gas (Willett: paragraph [0075]);
As for claim 12, Brown as modified by Willett, Van De Vyver and Ali discloses a gas detection device (see above) that performs the claimed process. Regarding the second-to-last limitation (i.e. “wherein, if the analysis has detected the indicator, the gas detection device is configured to switch over from the monitoring mode into the measuring mode”), the examiner notes that this limitation is contingent and is not required.
As for claim 9, Brown as modified by Willett, Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that:
the detector (Willett: 2) has a controllable electrical variable (Brown: paragraph [0019] and Willett: resistance or current; paragraphs [0072] and [0073]), which correlates with the temperature of the detector when an electrical voltage is applied thereto;
the compensator (Willet: 4) has a controllable electrical variable (Brown: paragraph [0019] and Willett: resistance or current; paragraphs [0072] and [0073]), which correlates with the temperature of the compensator when an electrical voltage is applied thereto;
the gas detection device is configured to carry out a closed-loop control (Brown: constant current; paragraph [0019] and Willett: constant current; paragraphs [0072]-[0074]) with a control gain (i.e. a target current for constant current control) that the controllable electrical variable for the detector follows a first predefined time course (Brown: constant current; paragraph [0019] and Willett: constant current; paragraphs [0072]-[0074]) and the controllable electrical variable for the compensator follows a second predefined time course (Brown: constant current; paragraph [0019] and Willett: constant current; paragraphs [0072]-[0074]).
As for claim 10, Brown as modified by Willett, Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that both the controllable electrical variable of the detector and the controllable electrical variable of the compensator comprise a current intensity of electrical current, which flows through the detector and through the compensator, respectively (Brown: constant current; paragraph [0019] and Willett: constant current; paragraphs [0072]-[0074]);
the detector (Brown: 7) and the compensator (Brown: 8) are electrically connected in series (Brown: see Fig. 3); and
a control gain (Brown: i.e. a target current during constant current control; paragraph [0019]) during the control is that the controllable electrical variable (current) for the detector and the controllable electrical variable for the compensator takes a same predefined target value (Brown: because the detector and compensator are in series; see Fig. 3).
As for claim 11, Brown as modified by Willett, Van De Vyver and Ali discloses that:
the gas detection device is configured to specify a value of the controllable electrical variable for the detector and a value of the controllable electrical variable for the compensator, which respective value is used for the control gain during the control (Brown: constant current determined by constant current source 28);
the gas detection device is configured to carry out the specification of the target value as a function of a respective value (Brown: constant current determined by constant current source 28), at which respective value the controllable variable has been set in a situation in which no target gas has been detected and to use the respective value used in this situation as a predefined target value for the control gain (Brown: constant current determined by constant current source 28).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/2/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 23 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that the claimed invention specifies a monitoring mode in which detection is only based on the compensator temperature. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., detection that is only based on compensator temperature) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
On page 24 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that a person of ordinary skill would not be motivated to find a fourth measure to reduce power consumption. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Ali explicitly discloses the desire for reducing power consumption using a thin-film compensator.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of claims 10 and 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Brown, Willett, Van De Vyver and Ali.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN N OLAMIT whose telephone number is (571)270-1969. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (Pacific).
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/JUSTIN N OLAMIT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853