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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/18/2025 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 87 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 87, “according a sampling frequency” in line 14 of the claim should read “according to a sampling frequency”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 69, 71-75, 82-88 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McMenemy et al (US Patent No. 20180222566 A1) hereinafter McMenemy in view of Oestrem et al (US Patent Application No. 20190084657 A1) hereinafter Oestrem in view of Hays et al (US Patent No. 6260004 B1) hereinafter Hays In view of TECHCROSS Co Ltd (Korean Patent No. KR 101901626 B1) hereinafter TECHCROSS.
Regarding Claim 69, McMenemy teaches the overall structural system of the instant claim, while Oestrem teaches the use of sampling data to create normal an abnormal trends with which to compare current sampling data for more effective analysis of vessel systems. Hays teaches the use of flow meters to predict plugging strainers upstream of pumps, and that flow meters regularly include pressure sensors. McMenemy teaches pressure sensors for the detection of plugging strainers, and so flow meters with pressure sensors is clearly a known alternative solution. TECHCROSS is referenced only to teach that electrolysis systems can cause fires if not shut down when flow is stopped.
McMenemy teaches a ballast water treatment apparatus (i.e., a water system; Fig. 2, #1) with a basic process flow of water passing from the ballast water inlet (Fig. 2, #12) through inlet strainers (i.e., a strainer; Fig. 2, #18), a flow meter (i.e., a flow meter configured to measure flow of the water in the flow path; Fig. 2, #20), a filter unit (Fig. 2, #22), pressure gauges (Fig. 2, #44) associated with the filter unit (Fig. 2, 22) for additional monitoring (i.e., (ii) a pressure sensor configured to measure a fluid pressure in the flow path; Paragraph 0376), a water treatment unit (Fig. 2, #24) and to the outlet (i.e., defining a flow path for water when the water is flowing through the water system; Fig. 2, #14) in which the water treatment unit can be an electro chlorination treatment unit (i.e., electrodes; Paragraphs 0361 and 0363). McMenemy further teaches that the flow meters are operable to measure and determine the flow rate of water and control a control valve (Paragraphs 0043-0044), a water monitoring unit (Fig. 2, #30) which provides an indication of comparison between monitored and reference parameters where the indication may be a visible “Pass” or “Fail” (Paragraph 0371), and the filter unit (Fig. 2, #22) detects when the filter elements are becoming clogged and operates to clean them by backflushing (i.e., determine that the strainer has a clog or a partial clog; Paragraph 0376).
McMenemy does not teach a display including a warning indicator, the display being configured to generate a plurality of different alerts, at least one of the plurality of different alerts including activation of the warning indicator, a diagnostic system configured to sample measurements of the flow of water made by the flow meter at each of first sampling times and second sampling times that are different from each other; determine a first flow variability over a first period of time based on the measurements from the first sampling times and a second flow variability over a second period of time based on the measurements from the second sampling times, the first flow variability indicating an amount by which the measurements from the first sampling times vary from a mean flow and the second flow variability indicating an amount by which the measurements from the second sampling times vary from the mean flow, the first flow variability being different from the second flow variability; and determine, based on at least the first flow variability and the second flow variability, different faults in different components of the water system wherein one of the plurality of different alerts, including the activation of the warning indicator, is generated on the display wherein another of the plurality of different alerts is generated on the display when the different fault in another of the different components of the water system is determined.
However, Oestrem teaches an advisory system (i.e., a diagnostic system) that provides for the monitoring of vessel systems that reduces cost of operating the vessel and increases operation time of the vessel (Paragraph 0004) that does so by storing sample values over time periods in both a normal and abnormal state which can be compared to current sampled values to determine if the current sampled values are normal or abnormal (i.e., configured to sample measurements of the flow of water made by the flow meter at each of first sampling times and second sampling times that are different from each other; determine a first flow variability over a first period of time based on the measurements from the first sampling times and a second flow variability over a second period of time based on the measurements from the second sampling times, the first flow variability indicating an amount by which the measurements from the first sampling times vary from a mean flow and the second flow variability indicating an amount by which the measurements from the second sampling times vary from the mean flow, the first flow variability being different from the second flow variability) with the communication displayed on a user interface of an operator console (i.e., a display including a warning indicator, the display being configured to generate a plurality of different alerts, at least one of the plurality of different alerts including activation of the warning indicator; Paragraph 0008) where stored data includes averages, standard deviations, and confidence intervals (i.e., determine, based on at least the first flow variability and the second flow variability; Paragraph 0033) with the advisory system providing notifications and alerts to operators via a user interface (i.e., different faults in different components of the water system wherein one of the plurality of different alerts, including the activation of the warning indicator, is generated on the display wherein another of the plurality of different alerts is generated on the display when the different fault in another of the different components of the water system is determined; Paragraph 0029).
Oestrem is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to an advisory system that monitors variables of a vessel system inclusive of systems and subsystems that are used to operate the vessel (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ballast water treatment apparatus as taught by McMenemy with the advisory system as taught by Oestrem because the advisory system would reduce the cost of operating the vessel and increase the operation time of the vessel.
McMenemy in view of Oestrem does not explicitly teach wherein the flow meter includes at least one of (ii) a pressure sensor configured to measure a fluid pressure in the flow path, a diagnostic system operatively connected to the flow meter, wherein at least a first of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on at least the first flow variability and the second flow variability different faults in different components of the water system, one of the different components including the strainer, the different fault in the strainer including that the strainer has a clog or a partial clog, wherein one of the plurality of different alerts, including the activation of the warning indicator, is generated on the display when the clog or the partial clog in the strainer is determined, and wherein at least a first of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on a comparison of the first flow variability and the second flow variability.
However, Hays teaches an apparatus to diagnose any rotating machine, but specifically a pump system (Col. 6, Lines 43-45), which uses stored pump performance curves including flow curves (Col. 8, Lines 49-56) to compare acquired process variables from sensors measuring current conditions deduce and diagnose the pump by component (Col. 9, Lines 1-18), where process sensors include a flowmeter (i.e., a diagnostic system operatively connected to the flow meter; Fig. 1, #28; Col. 10, Lines 49-67). Hays further teaches that a plugged outlet pipe (Fig. 1 #20) can be determined by the diagnostic apparatus (Fig. 1, #24) by comparing the measured outlet flow at identical head pressure is less than original flow and a plugged suction line (Fig. 1, #18) may be diagnosed by obtaining the original flow rate and original net positive suction head and comparing them to the measured net positive suction head (i.e., wherein at least a first of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on at least the first flow variability and the second flow variability different faults in different components of the water system, one of the different components including the strainer, the different fault in the strainer including that the strainer has a clog or a partial clog; Col. 30, Lines 17-51) and that the diagnostic system has a host computer which contains an alarm and alert management system (i.e., wherein one of the plurality of different alerts, including the activation of the warning indicator, is generated on the display when the clog or the partial clog in the strainer is determined wherein at least a first of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on a comparison of the first flow variability and the second flow variability; Col. 8 Lines 25-35). Hays teaches that the purpose of the apparatus is to validate installation of pumps, diagnose changes in operating conditions for pumps for maintenance and to change operating conditions, verify maintenance of pumps, and collect baseline data to provide an audit trail of maintenance records for pumps (Col. 10, Lines 33-48). Hays further teaches that process sensors may include an outlet pressure sensor (Fig. 1, #26; Col. 10, Lines 49-67) and the calculation of flow through the measurements of pressure and known properties in the absence of a flowmeter (i.e., wherein the flow meter includes at least one of (ii) a pressure sensor configured to measure a fluid pressure in the flow path; Col. 11, Lines 3-25). The system taught by Hays diagnosis problems with the upstream and downstream pipes/equipment regarding flow and direct pump related issues (Col. 6, Lines 22-42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ballast water treatment apparatus made obvious by McMenemy in view of Oestrem with comparisons of sample data to pump curves as taught by Hays because the comparison of pump curves to sample data would validate installation of pumps, diagnose changes in operating conditions for pumps for maintenance and to change operating conditions, verify maintenance of pumps, and collect baseline data to provide an audit trail of maintenance records for pumps.
McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays does not explicitly teach wherein the diagnostics system is configured, in response to determining at least one of the different faults, to automatically increase or decrease an electrical current to the electrodes.
However, TECHCROSS teaches that the flow rate measuring device of the ballast water measurement system may be configured to shut down the electrolysis device when the control unit calculates a deviated flow rate (i.e., wherein the diagnostics system is configured, in response to determining at least one of the different faults, to automatically increase or decrease an electrical current to the electrodes) for the purpose of preventing a fire which may occur if ballast water is continually treated without flow (Paragraphs 0040-0041, Machine Translation).
TECHCROSS is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a ship’s ballast water treatment system (Paragraph 0001). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ballast water treatment apparatus made obvious by McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays with the automatic shutdown of the electrolysis unit as taught by TECHCROSS because the electrolysis unit would risk starting a fire on the vessel if left running.
Regarding Claim 71, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 69. Hays further teaches the use of a laptop computer for executing the required signal conditioning and methods (i.e., wherein the diagnostics system includes: one or more processors; and a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing computer readable instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors,; Col. 7, Lines 1-64) where the hypothesis of the diagnostic system can be cavitation (plugging upstream) or deadheading (plugging downstream) for the pump (i.e., cause the one or more processors to determine that the strainer has a clog or a partial cog and to provide the one of the plurality of alerts; Col. 21, Lines 10-30 and Col. 29, Lines 44-58).
Regarding Claim 72, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 69. Hays further teaches that the diagnostic device can send a signal to shut down the pump after diagnosing a pump deadhead condition based upon comparison of pump head pressure data and valve position data (i.e., wherein the diagnostics system is further configured to:(iii) determine a remedial action for the clog or the partial clog; Col. 29, Lines 44-58) and send diagnostic alerts (Fig. 4a, #154) on a computer so that an operator can provide immediate corrective action (i.e., (iv) suggest the remedial action via a user device; Col. 16, Lines 42-54).
Regarding Claim 73, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 72. Hays further teaches that the diagnostic device can send a signal to shut down the pump after diagnosing a pump deadhead condition based upon comparison of pump head pressure data and valve position data (i.e., wherein the diagnostics system is further configured to: (v) perform the remedial action; Col. 29, Lines 44-58).
Regarding Claim 74, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 72. Hays further teaches that the diagnostic device can send a signal to shut down the pump after diagnosing a pump deadhead condition based upon comparison of pump head pressure data and valve position data (i.e., wherein the remedial action includes one or more of: changing a speed of a pump and shutting down the pump; Col. 29, Lines 44-58).
Regarding Claim 75, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 69. McMenemy further teaches that the strainer (Fig. 2, #18) comprise basket sea strainers (i.e., wherein the strainer has a basket type configuration; Paragraph 0365).
Regarding Claim 82, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 69. McMenemy further teaches that the outlet of the apparatus (Fig. 1, #1) connects to a ship’s ballast tank, or tanks (Paragraphs 0023-0024) and connects to power from a vessel (i.e., a watercraft, comprising the system for a watercraft of claim 69; Paragraph 0362).
Regarding Claim 83, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS in makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 69. McMenemy further teaches that the strainer (Fig. 2, #18) comprise basket sea strainers (i.e., wherein the strainer includes a basket straining filter; mounts within an interior of a strainer housing and that collects material within an interior of the basket straining filter, the straining filter including filtering media, an opening being defined through a side of the filtering media, the opening aligning with a water inlet that directs the water into the strainer; Paragraph 0365). McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS teaches the claimed invention except for being removably mounted. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to removably mount the strainer and electrolysis unit, since it has been held that constructing formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in art (In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961); MPEP 2144.04(V)(C)). One would have been motivated to make the elements separable for the purpose of cleaning the filter elements more easily.
Regarding Claim 84, McMenemy teaches the overall structural system of the instant claim, while Oestrem teaches the use of sampling data to create normal an abnormal trends with which to compare current sampling data for more effective analysis of vessel systems. Hays teaches the use of flow meters to predict plugging strainers upstream of pumps, and that flow meters regularly include pressure sensors. McMenemy teaches pressure sensors for the detection of plugging strainers, and so flow meters with pressure sensors is clearly a known alternative solution. TECHCROSS is referenced only to teach that electrolysis systems can cause fires if not shut down when flow is stopped.
McMenemy teaches a ballast water treatment apparatus (i.e., a water system; Fig. 2, #1) with a basic process flow of water passing from the ballast water inlet (Fig. 2, #12) through inlet strainers (i.e., a strainer; Fig. 2, #18), a flow meter (i.e., a flow meter configured to measure flow of the water in the flow path; Fig. 2, #20), a filter unit (Fig. 2, #22), pressure gauges (Fig. 2, #44) associated with the filter unit (Fig. 2, 22) for additional monitoring (i.e., (ii) a pressure sensor configured to measure a fluid pressure in the flow path; Paragraph 0376), a water treatment unit (Fig. 2, #24) and to the outlet (i.e., defining a flow path for water when the water is flowing through the water system; Fig. 2, #14) in which the water treatment unit can be an electro chlorination treatment unit (i.e., electrodes; Paragraphs 0361 and 0363). McMenemy further teaches that the flow meters are operable to measure and determine the flow rate of water and control a control valve (Paragraphs 0043-0044), a water monitoring unit (Fig. 2, #30) which provides an indication of comparison between monitored and reference parameters where the indication may be a visible “Pass” or “Fail” (Paragraph 0371), and the filter unit (Fig. 2, #22) detects when the filter elements are becoming clogged and operates to clean them by backflushing (i.e., determine that the strainer has a clog or a partial clog; Paragraph 0376).
McMenemy does not teach a display including a warning indicator, the display being configured to generate a plurality of different alerts, at least one of the plurality of different alerts including activation of the warning indicator, a diagnostics system configured to take first measurements and second measurements of a first sampling frequency and a second sampling frequency that are different from each other to determine different faults in different components of the water system; wherein another of the plurality of different alerts is generated on the display when the different fault in another of the different components of the water system is determined; wherein at least a first of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on the first measurements and the first sampling frequency; wherein at least a second of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on the second measurements and the second sampling frequency.
However, Oestrem teaches an advisory system (i.e., a diagnostic system) that provides for the monitoring of vessel systems that reduces cost of operating the vessel and increases operation time of the vessel (Paragraph 0004) that does so by storing sample values over time periods in both a normal and abnormal state which can be compared to current sampled values to determine if the current sampled values are normal or abnormal (i.e., a diagnostics system configured to take first measurements and second measurements of a first sampling frequency and a second sampling frequency that are different from each other to determine different faults in different components of the water system is determined) with the communication displayed on a user interface of an operator console (i.e., a display including a warning indicator, the display being configured to generate a plurality of different alerts, at least one of the plurality of different alerts including activation of the warning indicator; Paragraph 0008) with an example of a standard sampling rate of 1 Hz, or one sample per second, for a device and the system uses a warning system every 2 or 20 days (i.e., wherein at least a first of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on the first measurements and the first sampling frequency; wherein at least a second of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on the second measurements and the second sampling frequency; Paragraph 0057-0058) with the advisory system providing notifications and alerts to operators via a user interface (Paragraph 0029). Essentially, the saved time-series data is the second sampling frequency and the standard meter sampling frequency is the first sampling frequency.
Oestrem is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to an advisory system that monitors variables of a vessel system inclusive of systems and subsystems that are used to operate the vessel (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ballast water treatment apparatus as taught by McMenemy with the advisory system as taught by Oestrem because the advisory system would reduce the cost of operating the vessel and increase the operation time of the vessel.
McMenemy in view of Oestrem does not explicitly teach wherein the flow meter includes at least one of (ii) a pressure sensor configured to measure a fluid pressure in the flow path, a diagnostics system operatively connected to the flow meter and configured to take first measurements and second measurements of the flow of water made by the flow meter according to each, respectively, of a first sampling frequency and a second sampling frequency that are different from each other to determine, based on the first measurements and the second measurements made by the flow meter, different faults in different components of the water system, one of the different components including the strainer, the different fault in the strainer including that the strainer has a clog or a partial clog, wherein one of the plurality of different alerts, including the activation of the warning indicator, is generated on the display when the clog or the partial clog in the strainer is determined.
However, Hays teaches an apparatus to diagnose any rotating machine, but specifically a pump system (Col. 6, Lines 43-45), which uses stored pump performance curves including flow curves (Col. 8, Lines 49-56) to compare acquired process variables from sensors measuring current conditions deduce and diagnose the pump by component (Col. 9, Lines 1-18), where process sensors include a flowmeter (i.e., a diagnostic system operatively connected to the flow meter; Fig. 1, #28; Col. 10, Lines 49-67). Hays further teaches that a plugged outlet pipe (Fig. 1 #20) can be determined by the diagnostic apparatus (Fig. 1, #24) by comparing the measured outlet flow at identical head pressure is less than original flow and a plugged suction line (Fig. 1, #18) may be diagnosed by obtaining the original flow rate and original net positive suction head and comparing them to the measured net positive suction head (i.e., configured to take first measurements and second measurements of the flow of water made by the flow meter according to each, respectively, of a first sampling frequency and a second sampling frequency that are different from each other to determine, based on the first measurements and the second measurements made by the flow meter, different faults in different components of the water system one of the different components including the strainer, the different fault in the strainer including that the strainer has a clog or a partial clog; Col. 30, Lines 17-51) and that the diagnostic system has a host computer which contains an alarm and alert management system (i.e., wherein one of the plurality of different alerts, including the activation of the warning indicator, is generated on the display when the clog or the partial clog in the strainer is determined; Col. 8 Lines 25-35). Hays teaches that the purpose of the apparatus is to validate installation of pumps, diagnose changes in operating conditions for pumps for maintenance and to change operating conditions, verify maintenance of pumps, and collect baseline data to provide an audit trail of maintenance records for pumps (Col. 10, Lines 33-48). Hays further teaches that process sensors may include an outlet pressure sensor (Fig. 1, #26; Col. 10, Lines 49-67) and the calculation of flow through the measurements of pressure and known properties in the absence of a flowmeter (i.e., wherein the flow meter includes at least one of (ii) a pressure sensor configured to measure a fluid pressure in the flow path; Col. 11, Lines 3-25). The system taught by Hays diagnosis problems with the upstream and downstream pipes/equipment regarding flow and direct pump related issues (Col. 6, Lines 22-42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ballast water treatment apparatus made obvious by McMenemy in view of Oestrem with comparisons of sample data to pump curves as taught by Hays because the comparison of pump curves to sample data would validate installation of pumps, diagnose changes in operating conditions for pumps for maintenance and to change operating conditions, verify maintenance of pumps, and collect baseline data to provide an audit trail of maintenance records for pumps.
McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays does not explicitly teach wherein the diagnostics system is configured, in response to determining at least one of the different faults, to automatically increase or decrease an electrical current to the electrodes.
However, TECHCROSS teaches that the flow rate measuring device of the ballast water measurement system may be configured to shut down the electrolysis device when the control unit calculates a deviated flow rate (i.e., wherein the diagnostics system is configured, in response to determining at least one of the different faults, to automatically increase or decrease an electrical current to the electrodes) for the purpose of preventing a fire which may occur if ballast water is continually treated without flow (Paragraphs 0040-0041, Machine Translation).
TECHCROSS is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a ship’s ballast water treatment system (Paragraph 0001). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ballast water treatment apparatus made obvious by McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays with the automatic shutdown of the electrolysis unit as taught by TECHCROSS because the electrolysis unit would risk starting a fire on the vessel if left running.
Regarding Claim 85, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS in makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 84. Hays further teaches that deadheading of a pump can be alerted by the use of baseline head vs flow data across a valve and a valve position sensor (i.e., wherein at least a third of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on the first sampling frequency and the second sampling frequency; Col. 11, Lines 3-25).
Regarding Claim 86, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS in makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 84. Oestrem further teaches that trends are gathered in segments over time (Paragraph 0008). The trend lines are intersperse through-out the constant sampling of the meters, therefore there are periodically second measurements taken after all of first measurements (i.e., wherein all of the second measurements are taken after all of the first measurements).
Regarding Claim 87, McMenemy teaches the overall structural system of the instant claim, while Oestrem teaches the use of sampling data to create normal an abnormal trends with which to compare current sampling data for more effective analysis of vessel systems. Hays teaches the use of flow meters to predict plugging strainers upstream of pumps, and that flow meters regularly include pressure sensors. McMenemy teaches pressure sensors for the detection of plugging strainers, and so flow meters with pressure sensors is clearly a known alternative solution. TECHCROSS is referenced only to teach that electrolysis systems can cause fires if not shut down when flow is stopped.
McMenemy teaches a ballast water treatment apparatus (i.e., a water system; Fig. 2, #1) with a basic process flow of water passing from the ballast water inlet (Fig. 2, #12) through inlet strainers (i.e., a strainer; Fig. 2, #18), a flow meter (i.e., a flow meter configured to measure flow of the water in the flow path; Fig. 2, #20), a filter unit (Fig. 2, #22), pressure gauges (Fig. 2, #44) associated with the filter unit (Fig. 2, 22) for additional monitoring (i.e., (ii) a pressure sensor configured to measure a fluid pressure in the flow path; Paragraph 0376), a water treatment unit (Fig. 2, #24) and to the outlet (i.e., defining a flow path for water when the water is flowing through the water system; Fig. 2, #14) in which the water treatment unit can be an electro chlorination treatment unit (i.e., electrodes; Paragraphs 0361 and 0363). McMenemy further teaches that the flow meters are operable to measure and determine the flow rate of water and control a control valve (Paragraphs 0043-0044), a water monitoring unit (Fig. 2, #30) which provides an indication of comparison between monitored and reference parameters where the indication may be a visible “Pass” or “Fail” (Paragraph 0371), and the filter unit (Fig. 2, #22) detects when the filter elements are becoming clogged and operates to clean them by backflushing (i.e., determine that the strainer has a clog or a partial clog; Paragraph 0376).
McMenemy does not teach a display including a warning indicator, the display being configured to generate a plurality of different alerts, at least one of the plurality of different alerts including activation of the warning indicator, a diagnostic system configured to take measurements of the flow of water made by the flow meter according a sampling frequency to determine different faults in different components of the water system; wherein another of the plurality of different alerts is generated on the display when the different fault in another of the different components of the water system is determined; wherein at least a first of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on the sampling frequency.
However, Oestrem teaches an advisory system (i.e., a diagnostic system) that provides for the monitoring of vessel systems that reduces cost of operating the vessel and increases operation time of the vessel (Paragraph 0004) that does so by storing sample values over time periods in both a normal and abnormal state which can be compared to current sampled values to determine if the current sampled values are normal or abnormal (i.e., configured to take measurements of the flow of water made by the flow meter according a sampling frequency to determine different faults in different components of the water system) with the communication displayed on a user interface of an operator console (i.e., a display including a warning indicator, the display being configured to generate a plurality of different alerts, at least one of the plurality of different alerts including activation of the warning indicator; Paragraph 0008) where stored data includes averages, standard deviations, and confidence intervals (i.e., wherein at least a first of the different faults is determined by the diagnostics system based on the sampling frequency; Paragraph 0033) with the advisory system providing notifications and alerts to operators via a user interface (i.e., wherein another of the plurality of different alerts is generated on the display when the different fault in another of the different components of the water system is determined; Paragraph 0029).
Oestrem is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to an advisory system that monitors variables of a vessel system inclusive of systems and subsystems that are used to operate the vessel (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ballast water treatment apparatus as taught by McMenemy with the advisory system as taught by Oestrem because the advisory system would reduce the cost of operating the vessel and increase the operation time of the vessel.
McMenemy in view of Oestrem does not explicitly teach wherein the flow meter includes at least one of (ii) a pressure sensor configured to measure a fluid pressure in the flow path, a diagnostic system operatively connected to the flow meter, one of the different components including the strainer, the different fault in the strainer including that the strainer has a clog or a partial clog, wherein one of the plurality of different alerts, including the activation of the warning indicator, is generated on the display when the clog or the partial clog in the strainer is determined.
However, Hays teaches an apparatus to diagnose any rotating machine, but specifically a pump system (Col. 6, Lines 43-45), which uses stored pump performance curves including flow curves (Col. 8, Lines 49-56) to compare acquired process variables from sensors measuring current conditions deduce and diagnose the pump by component (Col. 9, Lines 1-18), where process sensors include a flowmeter (i.e., a diagnostic system operatively connected to the flow meter; Fig. 1, #28; Col. 10, Lines 49-67). Hays further teaches that a plugged outlet pipe (Fig. 1 #20) can be determined by the diagnostic apparatus (Fig. 1, #24) by comparing the measured outlet flow at identical head pressure is less than original flow and a plugged suction line (Fig. 1, #18) may be diagnosed by obtaining the original flow rate and original net positive suction head and comparing them to the measured net positive suction head (i.e., one of the different components including the strainer, the different fault in the strainer including that the strainer has a clog or a partial clog; Col. 30, Lines 17-51) and that the diagnostic system has a host computer which contains an alarm and alert management system (i.e., wherein one of the plurality of different alerts, including the activation of the warning indicator, is generated on the display when the clog or the partial clog in the strainer is determined; Col. 8 Lines 25-35). Hays teaches that the purpose of the apparatus is to validate installation of pumps, diagnose changes in operating conditions for pumps for maintenance and to change operating conditions, verify maintenance of pumps, and collect baseline data to provide an audit trail of maintenance records for pumps (Col. 10, Lines 33-48). Hays further teaches that process sensors may include an outlet pressure sensor (Fig. 1, #26; Col. 10, Lines 49-67) and the calculation of flow through the measurements of pressure and known properties in the absence of a flowmeter (i.e., wherein the flow meter includes at least one of (ii) a pressure sensor configured to measure a fluid pressure in the flow path; Col. 11, Lines 3-25). The system taught by Hays diagnosis problems with the upstream and downstream pipes/equipment regarding flow and direct pump related issues (Col. 6, Lines 22-42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ballast water treatment apparatus made obvious by McMenemy in view of Oestrem with comparisons of sample data to pump curves as taught by Hays because the comparison of pump curves to sample data would validate installation of pumps, diagnose changes in operating conditions for pumps for maintenance and to change operating conditions, verify maintenance of pumps, and collect baseline data to provide an audit trail of maintenance records for pumps.
McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays does not explicitly teach wherein the diagnostics system is configured, in response to determining at least one of the different faults, to automatically increase or decrease an electrical current to the electrodes.
However, TECHCROSS teaches that the flow rate measuring device of the ballast water measurement system may be configured to shut down the electrolysis device when the control unit calculates a deviated flow rate (i.e., wherein the diagnostics system is configured, in response to determining at least one of the different faults, to automatically increase or decrease an electrical current to the electrodes) for the purpose of preventing a fire which may occur if ballast water is continually treated without flow (Paragraphs 0040-0041, Machine Translation).
TECHCROSS is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a ship’s ballast water treatment system (Paragraph 0001). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ballast water treatment apparatus made obvious by McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays with the automatic shutdown of the electrolysis unit as taught by TECHCROSS because the electrolysis unit would risk starting a fire on the vessel if left running.
Regarding Claim 88, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS in makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 69. Oestrem further teaches that trends are gathered in segments over time (Paragraph 0008). The trend lines are intersperse through-out the constant sampling of the meters, therefore there are periodically second measurements taken after all of first measurements (i.e., wherein an entirety of the second period of time is after the first period of time).
Claims 76-78 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS as applied to claim 69 above, and further in view of Park et al (US Patent No. 20160130165 A1) hereinafter Park.
Regarding Claim 76, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 69. McMenemy further teaches that the strainer (Fig. 2, #18) comprise basket sea strainers (Paragraph 0365).
McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS does not teach wherein the strainer includes an electrolytic cell integrated therewith.
However, Park teaches a ballast water treatment including a filter and electrolysis unit for filtering and electrolyzing the ballast water (Paragraph 0012) where a filter element is positioned inside the cover (Fig. 2a, #13) of the electrolysis unit (Fig. 2a, #10; Paragraphs 0038-0040) for the purpose of having sterilization efficiency that meets United States Coast Guard standards (Paragraphs 0021-0022).
Park is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a ballast water treatment system (Paragraph 0001). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the strainer and electrolysis unit made obvious by McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS with the combined electrolysis unit as taught by Park because the combined unit would have a sterilization efficiency that meets the United States Coast Guard standards.
Regarding Claim 77, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS in view of Park makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 76. McMenemy further teaches that the strainer (Fig. 2, #18) comprise basket sea strainers (i.e., wherein the strainer includes a basket type straining filter; the straining filter including filtering media; Paragraph 0365). Park further teaches that the filter element (Fig. 2b, #130) is mounted in the interior of the housing (i.e., mounts within an interior of a strainer housing; Fig. 2b, #11) that receives the electrode module (i.e., that receives electrodes of the electrolytic cell; Fig. 2b, #121) and the water flows through the inlet (Fig. 2b, #112) and into the filter element (i.e., an opening being defined through a side of the filtering media, the opening aligning with a water inlet that directs the water into the strainer; Fig. 2b; Paragraphs 0071-0073). McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS in view of Park teaches the claimed invention except for being removably mounted. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to removably mount the strainer and electrolysis unit, since it has been held that constructing formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in art (In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961); MPEP 2144.04(V)(C)). One would have been motivated to make the elements separable for the purpose of cleaning the filter elements more easily.
Regarding Claim 78, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS in view of Park makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 77. McMenemy further teaches that it is conventional to for a filter unit to detect when it is becoming clogged and to clean by means of backflushing the filter (Paragraph 0376) and that the strainers are able to be isolated for cleaning (Paragraph 0365). Hays further teaches that the diagnostic device can send a signal to shut down the pump after diagnosing a pump deadhead condition based upon comparison of pump head pressure data and valve position data (i.e., wherein the diagnostics system is further configured to:(iii) determine a remedial action for the clog or the partial clog; Col. 29, Lines 44-58) and send diagnostic alerts (Fig. 4a, #154) on a computer so that an operator can provide immediate corrective action (i.e., (iv) suggest the remedial action via a user device; Col. 16, Lines 42-54). While McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS in view of Park does not explicitly teach the remedial action including to remove the straining filter from the strainer housing and then remove strained material from the filtering media, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS in view of Park does teach that filters and strainers regularly become plugged and that fixing the issue early is key to prolonging pump lifetime by preventing pump cavitation/deadheading. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to remove a plugged filter to clean it if the diagnostic system hypothesizes that a plug has occurred in the system.
Claim 81 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS as applied to claim 69 above, and further in view of Trela (US Patent No. 20190023596 A1) hereinafter Trela.
Regarding Claim 81, McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS makes obvious the system for a watercraft of claim 69. McMenemy further teaches that the source of ballast water is seawater (i.e., wherein the water system is configured to draw water into the flow path from a water source on which the watercraft is supported; Paragraph 0023).
McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS does not teach that the water source is drawn through at least a first port positioned in a body or hull of the watercraft.
However, Trela teaches an inlet hose (Fig. 1, #14) that receives unstrained seawater or lake water via a seacock (Fig. 1, #12) which is an interface between a body of water and a hull of a boat (Paragraph 0036) for the purpose of moving the strainer downstream of the inlet and above the waterline to prevent leaks at the strainer which may sink the boat (Paragraph 0019).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ballast water treatment apparatus made obvious by McMenemy in view of Oestrem in view of Hays in view of TECHCROSS to connect through the hull as taught by Trela because connecting through the hull would move the strainer downstream of the inlet and above the waterline to prevent leaks at the strainer which may sink the boat.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 06/18/2025 has been entered.
In view of the amendment to the claims, the amendment of claims 69 and 71 and the addition of new claims 83-88 have been acknowledged.
In view of the amendment to the claims, the previous claim objections have been withdrawn.
In view of the amendment to claim 69, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been withdrawn.
In view of the amendment to claim 69, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been modified.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 06/18/2025 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues, regarding claim 69, that the newly added limitations are not taught in the prior art of the previous rejection (Arguments filed 06/18/2025, Page 11).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 69 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. All other arguments have been indirectly addressed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ADRIEN GERMAIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5499. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30-4:30.
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, Vickie Kim can be reached at (571)272-0579. 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.
/A.A.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1777