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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/04/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3, and 5-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andree (US 2006/0169646), in view of Hicks et al. (US 2014/0311991A1).
Regarding claim 1, Andree teaches a controller for controlling a water system using an oxidizing chemistry (refer fig. 1, fig. 4), the controller configured to:
-receive first sensor data from a sensor of the water system in response to operation of the water system in a learning phase, wherein the sensor generates data indicative of oxidant level of the water system (refer [0034] disclosing a plurality of measurements from an ORP sensor and a free chlorine sensor), the sensor comprises an oxidation reduction potential sensor, and wherein the sensor data comprises oxidation reduction potential data (refer [0011], [0042], [0056], [0061]);
-determine learned water chemistry behavior based on the first sensor data, wherein the learned water chemistry behavior comprises a increase or decrease of the oxidant level of the water system (refer [0034] disclosing mapping a set of oxidation reduction potential and free available chlorine values of water to define a first control function);
-receive, in response to a determination of the learned water chemistry behavior, second sensor data from the sensor of the water system in response to operation of the water system in an automation phase (refer [0034] disclosing mapping a second set of corresponding oxidation reduction potential and available free chlorine values of water to define a second control function);
-determine observed water chemistry behavior based on the second sensor data, wherein the observed water chemistry behavior comprises a rate of increase or a rate of decrease of the oxidant level of the water system (refer [0034] disclosing mapping a second set of corresponding oxidation reduction potential and available free chlorine values of water to define a second control function);
-compare the observed water chemistry behavior to the learned water chemistry behavior associated with the water system (refer [0040] discloses comparing the difference between the expected ORP and the second measured ORP to a threshold parameter); and
-perform an automation action with the water system in response to comparison of the observed water chemistry behavior to the learned water chemistry behavior (refer step 424 in fig. 4, [0066]-[0068] discloses that output control signal can then be generated 424 based on the active characteristic function. The control signal can then be transmitted to one or more subsystems 122 and 124 to regulate, for example, addition of a species or activity thereof. For example, with reference to FIG. 1, a first component of control signal 126 can be generated and transmitted from controller 118 to subsystem 122 which can be a disinfecting system disposed and configured to introduce one or more disinfecting species, or one or more precursors thereof, such as chlorine, to achieve a target FAC concentration and/or a target ORP in water 112).
Andree further teaches that “the second array of corresponding measured oxidation-reduction potential values and free available chlorine species concentration values can be measured after a predetermined time following the measurement of the first array of corresponding measured oxidation-reduction potential values and free available chlorine species concentration values” indicating measuring ORP value over a time period (refer [0036]). [0049] discloses that “memory 204 may be used for storing historical data relating to the parameters of the water over a period of time, as well as current sensor measurement data”. [0061] discloses that “at any point in time, if the free chlorine measurement and the slope of the resulting chlorine redox relationship line can be determined, an ORP value can be calculated and compared to the ORP measurement. If the ORP measurement and the calculated ORP value differ by a predetermined amount, a new chlorine redox relationship can be identified from which to compare future calculated and measured ORP values”. [0073] discloses “the parameters of an incoming stream, such as, but not limited to, the flow rate, temperature, pH, can vary in a cyclical manner (e.g., by day of the week, by time of day, etc.). Such historical data reflecting parameters of the water may be used by one or more controllers to predict parameters at a future time, and adjust the amount of added species, the intensity of actinic radiation effectively delivered, and the amount of pH controlling species, in dependence thereon. Moreover, modifications to the algorithm can be incorporated to further enhance the responsiveness of the treatment effect. For example, where a precursor of a disinfecting species is directly introduced, a conversion or equivalent factor can be utilized to provide a correlation of an effective amount of active species delivered”. The cited paragraphs indicate/suggest monitoring ORP value over time and adjusting dosage of oxidant based on the monitored ORP values. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to monitor ORP value over time to adjust addition of amount of oxidizing chemistry to achieve desired amount of disinfection in water treatment systems.
With regards to measuring rate of change of a process parameter over time, Hicks teaches a method of controlling a real-time oxidation-reduction potential in a hot water system, an oxidation-reduction potential probe that is operable to measure a real-time oxidation-reduction potential in the hot water system, probe transmits the measured real-time potential to the controller, which assesses and interprets the transmitted potential to determine whether it conforms to an oxidation-reduction potential setting, if the measured potential does not conform the oxidation-reduction potential setting, the controller is operable to feed or remove one or more active chemical species into or from the hot water system and further operable to change at least one system parameter (refer abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the controller of Andree to include real-time monitoring of water system chemistry to actively control dosage of treatment product to control water chemistry as taught by Hicks.
Regarding claim 3, modified Andree teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. The limitations “wherein the controller is further configured to: operate the water system using the oxidizing chemistry in the learning phase; and operate the water system using the oxidizing chemistry in the automation phase in response to the determination of the learned water chemistry behavior” is taught by Andree because Andree discloses acts of measuring a first process parameter of the water, measuring a second process parameter of the water, generating a first control signal when the first process parameter and the second process parameter define a first characteristic relationship, and generating a second control signal when the first process parameter and the second process parameter define a second characteristic relationship (Refer [0010], [0040]).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, modified Andree teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Andree further teaches that the sensor comprises a chlorine sensor (refer [0011], [0061]).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, modified Andree teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Andree further teaches to perform the automation action comprises to modify an addition of the oxidizing chemistry based on the comparison of the observed water chemistry behavior to the learned water chemistry behavior (refer [0061] disclosing adding known aliquots or amounts of a known concentration of chlorine to water and recording the resulting ORP measurement and free chlorine measurement can result in a line whose slope can be predicted; and [0066] disclosing output control signal can then be generated 424 based on the active characteristic function. The control signal can then be transmitted to one or more subsystems 122 and 124 to regulate, for example, addition of a species or activity thereof. For example, with reference to FIG. 1, a first component of control signal 126 can be generated and transmitted from controller 118 to subsystem 122 which can be a disinfecting system disposed and configured to introduce one or more disinfecting species, or one or more precursors thereof, such as chlorine, to achieve a target FAC concentration and/or a target ORP in water 112), and to modify the addition of oxidizing chemistry comprises to send a control signal to modify operation of a pump coupled to the water system (refer [0047] disclosing Controller 118 typically provides or transmits one or more output signals 126 to the one or more subsystems 122 and 124 to regulate activity thereof, typically through actuation of one or more components such as valves and/or pumps therein, and [0058] disclosing control function can be utilized to generate one or more control signals 126 that can be utilized to actuate of one or more components, such as valves and pumps).
Regarding claim 9, modified Andree teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Andree further teaches to compare the observed water chemistry behavior to the learned water chemistry behavior comprises to determine whether the rate of increase of the observed water chemistry behavior is less than a rate of increase of the learned water chemistry (refer [0040] disclosing one or more acts directed to calculating one or more expected oxidation-reduction potential values, typically based on one or more particular control profiles, and one or more acts directed to determining a difference between the expected oxidation-reduction potential value and the second measured oxidation-reduction potential value, and one or more acts can be performed involving comparing the difference between the expected oxidation-reduction potential and the second measured oxidation-reduction potential to a threshold parameter); and to modify the addition of the oxidizing chemistry comprises to increase the addition in response to a determination that the rate of increase of the observed water chemistry behavior is less than the rate of increase of the learned water chemistry (refer [0069] disclosing “a target FAC value can be generated according to a characteristic function and be further adjusted to compensate for anticipated changes that can cyclically occur during use of the water system. For example, an aquatic facility can have varying loads associated with increased use. Because such increased loads can have periodic, sometimes well defined cycles, e.g. daily, which typically vary in the morning and/or afternoon, treatment system configurations utilizing the systems and techniques of the invention can be constructed to anticipate such increased and/or decreased loading conditions, fully or even portions thereof”, [0070] discloses that “the respective amounts of disinfecting species added to the water may be independently adjusted to meet required metrics for the treated water in an economically efficient manner. For example, when it is determined that metrics for the levels of oxidation-reduction potential are met, but appreciable levels of free available chlorine are present, the amount of disinfecting species, or precursors thereof, added may be reduced to further optimize the system. Alternatively, when it is determined that the desired metrics for the levels of, for example, the oxidation-reduction potential are not met, but insufficient free available chlorine is below a desirable range, the amount of the individual or collective disinfecting species added may be increased to further optimize the system”).
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Andree, in view of Hicks as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Giuere (US 2019/0194034).
Regarding claims 10-11, modified Andree teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Andree does not teach to perform the automation action comprises to generate a notification based on the comparison of the observed water chemistry behavior to the learned water chemistry behavior, and to generate the notification comprises to trigger an audible or visual alarm, to send a text message, or to send an email message.
Giguere teaches a water treatment system comprising (a) a water quality assessment module that includes (i) a plurality of sensors comprising at least an oxidation reduction potential sensor (ORP), and (ii) a control module in operational engagement with the plurality of sensors; (b) a water supply intended for delivery of potable water to a consumer; (c) a water sampling device comprising a fluid delivery means configured to provide a sample of water derived from the water supply to the water quality assessment module; and (d) a chlorine feed source and an ammonia feed source in which each of the sources are, independently: (i) in operational engagement with the water quality assessment module; and (ii) in fluid communication with the water supply (refer [0022]). Giguere further teaches that water quality assessment module 215 is accordingly configured to monitor the system via the plurality of sensors 205 so as to provide pertinent information regarding at least the disinfectant level of water supply 225 in system 200, including providing alarms or other signals to an operator, if needed (refer [0113]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of modified Andree to include to perform the automation action comprises to generate a notification based on the comparison of the observed water chemistry behavior to the learned water chemistry behavior, and to generate the notification comprises to trigger an alert/alarm to notify an operator as taught by Giguere. Selection of what type of alarm (e.g. audible or visual) would have been an obvious matter of choice to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because the controller of claim 1 is obvious over combination of Andree and Hicks. Applicant argued that Andree does not teach rate of change of a process parameter over time. This is not found to be persuasive because Hicks discloses real-time monitoring of ORP to control dosage of treatment additive to control water chemistry (see claim rejection above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Drewniak et al. (US 2018/0186656) teaches a system and method of controlling the treatment of water systems comprises multiple feeders for separately feeding treatment products to a water system, a sensor verifies delivery of the treatment product to the water system, a controller receives signals from sensors, which can be used as inputs in calculating feed rates or feeder activation times according to the programed functions and can alter treatment product feed rates based on real time data regarding water system chemistry.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRANAV PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5142. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6AM-4PM.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
/PRANAV N PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777