DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed September 26, 2025 has been entered. Claims 22-29, 31-36 and 38-43 remain pending in the application.
Specification
The use of the terms Apple, iPhone, Google, Android, Amazon, Echo, HomePod, and Google Nest, which are trade names or a marks used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 31-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U. S. Patent 9,958,878 to Kochan.
Referring to claim 31, Kochan discloses a sump pump system comprising:
a water level sensor (22, 26), the water level sensor (22, 26) operable to detect a level of water in a sump (Fig. 2; col. 1 lines 48-51 and col. 4 lines 13-21);
a pump parameter sensor (56), the pump parameter sensor (56) operable to detect a parameter (current) relating to operation of a pump (P1, P2) (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65);
a user input/output module (12), the user input/output module (12) operable to communicate with a user (at least via 14, 16, 20, 22 and 40) (Figures 1 and 2; col. 4 lines 8-27, wherein the input portion is via 36 and 38); and
a processor (50), the processor (50) operable to communicate with the water level sensor (22, 26) the pump parameter sensor (56), and the user input/output module (12) (Figures 2 and 3; col. 4 lines 28-31 and 55-65, and col. 6 line 14- col. 9 line 6);
wherein the water level sensor (22, 26) is operable to detect the level of water in the sump and to send a signal to the processor (50) indicating the detected water level (Figures 2 and 3; col. 4 lines 28-31 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6);
wherein the pump parameter sensor (56) is operable to detect the parameter (current) relating to operation of the pump and to send a signal to the processor (50) indicating the detected pump parameter (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6);
wherein the processor is operable to receive the signal from the water level sensor (22, 26) indicating the detected water level and to receive the signal from the pump parameter sensor (56) indicating the detected pump parameter (current) (Figures 2 and 3; col. 4 lines 28-31 and 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6); and
wherein the processor (50) is operable to determine a water level state based on the detected water level (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 35-65) and to determine a pump running state based on the detected pump parameter (current) (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6);
wherein the processor (50) is operable to determine a current pump health state based on the water level state and the pump running state; wherein a last pump health state is the pump health state determined by the processor (50) prior to the current pump health state (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6, wherein at least in order to determine the disclosed “rate at which the water level changes,” the processor must compare a current pump health state to a prior pump health state);
wherein the processor (50) is operable to determine a flood risk (at least indicated by a “trending fault”) based on the water level state, the pump running state, the last pump health state, and the current pump health state and to and send a signal to the user input/output module (12) indicating the flood risk (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6); and
wherein the user input/output module (12) is operable to receive the signal from the processor (50) indicating the flood risk and display a notification to a user indicating the flood risk (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 32, Kochan discloses a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 31, as detailed above, and further discloses a system comprising:
the pump (P1, P2), the pump (P1, P2) operable to remove water from the sump (Fig. 2; col. 1 lines 46-52 and col. 4 lines 11-12 and 22-23).
Referring to claim 33, Kochan discloses a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 31, as detailed above, and further discloses a system comprising:
the pump parameter sensor (56) is a pump current sensor; and the pump current sensor (56) is operable to determine whether current is flowing to the pump (P1, P2) (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 34, Kochan discloses a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 31, as detailed above, and further discloses a system wherein:
the processor (50) is operable to determine if the pump (P1, P2) has failed based on the detected water level and the detected pump parameter (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 35, Kochan discloses a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 31, as detailed above, and further discloses a system wherein:
the processor (50) is operable to determine if the pump (P1, P2) is likely to fail (by determining a ‘trending fault” based on monitoring over time, the processor is also determining if the pump is operating in a state which is outside normal operating conditions for which the pump is designed for and therefore more likely to result in failure) based on the detected water level and the detected pump parameter (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 36, Kochan discloses a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 31, as detailed above, and further discloses a system wherein:
the pump (P1, P2) includes at least one of a primary pump (P1) and a backup pump (P2) (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 22-29 and 38-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U. S. Patent 9,958,878 to Kochan in view of U. S. Patent Publication 2018/0163730 to Wilds.
Referring to claim 22, Kochan teaches a sump pump system comprising:
a water level sensor (22, 26), the water level sensor (22, 26) operable to detect a level of water in a sump (Fig. 2; col. 1 lines 48-51 and col. 4 lines 13-21);
a pump parameter sensor (56), the pump parameter sensor (56) operable to detect a parameter (current) relating to operation of a pump (P1, P2) (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65);
a user input/output module (12), the user input/output module (12) operable to communicate with a user (at least via 14, 16, 20, 22 and 40) (Figures 1 and 2; col. 4 lines 8-27, wherein the input portion is via 36 and 38); and
a processor (50), the processor (50) operable to communicate with the water level sensor (22, 26), the pump parameter sensor (56) and the user input/output module (12) (Figures 2 and 3; col. 4 lines 28-31 and 55-65, and col. 6 line 14- col. 9 line 6);
wherein the water level sensor (22, 26) is operable to detect the level of water in the sump and to send a signal to the processor (50) indicating the detected water level (Figures 2 and 3; col. 4 lines 28-31 and col. 6 lines 35-40);
wherein the pump parameter sensor (56) is operable to detect the parameter (current) relating to operation of the pump and to send a signal to the processor (50) indicating the detected pump parameter (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65);
wherein the processor is operable to receive the signal from the water level sensor (22, 26) indicating the detected water level (Figures 2 and 3; col. 4 lines 28-31 and col. 6 lines 35-40) and to receive the signal from the pump parameter sensor (56) indicating the detected pump parameter (current) (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65);
wherein the processor (50) is operable to determine a water level state based on the detected water level (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 35-65) and to determine a pump parameter running state based on the detected pump parameter (current) (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14-65);
wherein the processor (50) is operable to determine a pump health state based on the water level state and the pump running state and send a signal to the user input/output module (12) indicating the pump health state; wherein the processor (50) is operable to periodically determine the pump health state and to periodically send the signal to the user input/output module (12) indicating the pump health state (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6);
wherein the user input/output module (12) is operable to receive the signal from the processor (50) indicating the pump health state and display a notification to a user indicating the pump health state; wherein the user input/output module (12) is operable to periodically receive the signal from the processor (50) indicating the pump health state and to periodically display the notification to the user indicating the pump health state (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Kochan does not teach indicating the pump health state regardless of a value of the pump health state. Low teaches a system comprising:
indicating a pump health state regardless of a value of the pump health state (abstract, paragraphs [0044], [0045], [0064] and [0068]).
It would have been obvious before the invention was effectively filed, to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the system taught by Kochan with the continuous indication taught by Low in order to provide the user with a continuous indication of the pump’s operation.
Referring to claim 23, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 22, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system comprising:
the pump (P1, P2), the pump (P1, P2) operable to remove water from the sump (Fig. 2; col. 1 lines 46-52 and col. 4 lines 11-12 and 22-23).
Referring to claim 24, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 22, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system comprising:
the pump parameter sensor (56) is a pump current sensor; and the pump current sensor (56) is operable to determine whether current is flowing to the pump (P1, P2) (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 25, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 22, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system wherein:
the processor (50) is operable to determine if the pump (P1, P2) has failed based on the detected water level and the detected pump parameter (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 26, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 22, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system wherein:
the processor (50) is operable to determine if the pump (P1, P2) is likely to fail (by determining a ‘trending fault” based on monitoring over time, the processor is also determining if the pump is operating in a state which is outside normal operating conditions for which the pump is designed for and therefore more likely to result in failure) based on the detected water level and the detected pump parameter (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 27, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 22, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system wherein:
the pump health state includes a current pump health state (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 28, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 22, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system wherein:
the pump health state includes a last pump health state (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 29, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 22, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system wherein:
the pump (P1, P2) includes at least one of a primary pump (P1) and a backup pump (P2) (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 38, Kochan teaches a sump pump system comprising:
a water level sensor (22, 26), the water level sensor (22, 26) operable to detect a level of water in a sump (Fig. 2; col. 1 lines 48-51 and col. 4 lines 13-21);
a pump parameter sensor (56), the pump parameter sensor (56) operable to detect a parameter (current) relating to operation of a pump (P1, P2) (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65);
a user input/output module (12), the user input/output module (12) operable to communicate with a user (at least via 14, 16, 20, 22 and 40) (Figures 1 and 2; col. 4 lines 8-27, wherein the input portion is via 36 and 38); and
a processor (50), the processor (50) operable to communicate with the water level sensor (22, 26) the pump parameter sensor (56), and the user input/output module (12) (Figures 2 and 3; col. 4 lines 28-31 and 55-65, and col. 6 line 14- col. 9 line 6);
wherein the water level sensor (22, 26) is operable to detect the level of water in the sump and to send a signal to the processor (50) indicating the detected water level (Figures 2 and 3; col. 4 lines 28-31 and col. 6 lines 35-40);
wherein the pump parameter sensor (56) is operable to detect the parameter (current) relating to operation of the pump and to send a signal to the processor (50) indicating the detected pump parameter (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6);
wherein the processor is operable to receive the signal from the water level sensor (22, 26) indicating the detected water level and to receive the signal from the pump parameter sensor (56) indicating the detected pump parameter (current) (Figures 2 and 3; col. 4 lines 28-31 and 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6); and
wherein the processor (50) is operable to determine a water level state based on the detected water level (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 35-65) and to determine a pump running state based on the detected pump parameter (current) (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6);
wherein the processor (50) is operable to determine a current pump health state based on the water level state and the pump running state; wherein a last pump health state is the pump health state determined by the processor (50) prior to the current pump health state (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6, wherein at least in order to determine the disclosed “rate at which the water level changes,” the processor must compare a current pump health state to a prior pump health state);
wherein the processor (50) is operable to determine a flood risk (at least indicated by a “trending fault”) based on the water level state, the pump running state, the last pump health state, and the current pump health state and to and send a signal to the user input/output module (12) indicating the flood risk; wherein the processor (50) is operable to periodically determine the flood risk and to periodically send the signal to the user input/output module (12) indicating the flood risk (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6); and
wherein the user input/output module (12) is operable to receive the signal from the processor (50) indicating the flood risk and display a notification to a user indicating the flood risk; and wherein the user input/output module (12) is operable to periodically receive the signal from the processor (50) indicating the flood risk and to periodically display the notification to the user indicating the flood risk (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Kochan does not teach indicating the flood risk regardless of a value of the flood risk. Low teaches a system comprising:
indicating a flood risk regardless of a value of the flood risk (abstract, paragraphs [0044], [0045], [0064] and [0068]).
It would have been obvious before the invention was effectively filed, to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the system taught by Kochan with the continuous indication taught by Low in order to provide the user with a continuous indication of the pump’s operation.
Referring to claim 39, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 38, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system comprising:
the pump (P1, P2), the pump (P1, P2) operable to remove water from the sump (Fig. 2; col. 1 lines 46-52 and col. 4 lines 11-12 and 22-23).
Referring to claim 40, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 38, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system comprising:
the pump parameter sensor (56) is a pump current sensor; and the pump current sensor (56) is operable to determine whether current is flowing to the pump (P1, P2) (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 41, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 38, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system wherein:
the processor (50) is operable to determine if the pump (P1, P2) has failed based on the detected water level and the detected pump parameter (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 42, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 38, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system wherein:
the processor (50) is operable to determine if the pump (P1, P2) is likely to fail (by determining a ‘trending fault” based on monitoring over time, the processor is also determining if the pump is operating in a state which is outside normal operating conditions for which the pump is designed for and therefore more likely to result in failure) based on the detected water level and the detected pump parameter (Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Referring to claim 43, Kochan and Low teach a sump pump system comprising all the limitations of claim 38, as detailed above, and Kochan further teaches a system wherein:
the pump (P1, P2) includes at least one of a primary pump (P1) and a backup pump (P2) (Fig. 2; col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on September 26, 2025 have been considered but, unless otherwise addressed below, are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
The Applicant argues that Kochan does not disclose “Kochan does not disclose or suggest determining (1) a pump health state based on a water level state and a pump running state, and/or (2) a flood risk based on a water level state, a pump running state, a last pump health state, and a current pump health state.” Remarks 3. However, Kochan teaches the monitoring over time of a water level and pump running state from which a fault can be determined. Kochan Fig. 2; col. 4 lines 55-65 and col. 6 lines 14 - col. 9 line 6. The Kochan determination of a fault is the determination of both a pump health state and a flood risk as claimed.
The Applicant further argues that Kochan fails to teach an indication when there is no fault. However, as detailed above, Low in combination with Kochan teaches this new recitation.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN MATTHEW LETTMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7860. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/BRYAN M LETTMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746