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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/13/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
This action is responsive to the Amendment and Remarks filed by Applicant in response to the Final Office Action mailed May 12, 2026. Claims 2, 6, 7, 11, 14, and 16-20 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 10, and 21 have been amended. Claims 1, 3-5, 8-10, 12, 13, 15, and 21 are pending and are examined on the merits herein.
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.
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:
"an electronic device" in claim 1 is understood to be one of a controller, data-loggers, a GPS unit, wireless transmitters or transceivers, or computer processors (see 1 0049 of the publication).
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(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3-5, 8-10, 12, 13, 15, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the recalibration converts the sensor reading to an actual temperature of a payload area of the dewar.” Claim 10 recites the identical phrase, “wherein the recalibration converts the sensor reading to an actual temperature of a payload area of the dewar.”
There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the sensor reading” in either claim. Claim 1 recites, in its body, only “at least one parameter” detected by the sensor; the phrase “a temperature reading of a dewar” appears solely in the preamble. Claim 10 recites “a temperature reading of the dewar” received from the sensor, but never recites a “sensor reading.” It is therefore unclear whether “the sensor reading” is intended to refer to the previously recited “at least one parameter” (claim 1), to the previously recited “temperature reading” (claim 10), or to some further quantity not otherwise recited. Appropriate correction is required. Amending “the sensor reading” to “the at least one parameter” in claim 1, and to “the temperature reading” in claim 10, would appear to obviate this rejection.
Claim 1 recites “the second recess has a second shape that has a smaller volume than has the first shape.” Claim 21 recites “wherein the third shape has a smaller volume than has the first shape.” These limitations are indefinite because a shape is a geometric form and does not itself possess a volume. It is unclear whether the recited comparison is between the volumes of the recesses that are said to have those shapes, between the volumes of some notional bodies conforming to those shapes, or between some other quantities. The specification does not define a volume attributable to a shape as distinct from the recess itself. Appropriate correction is required. Reciting that the second recess has a smaller volume than the first recess would appear to obviate this rejection.
Claim 21 recites “a first padding disposed in the first recess,” and thereafter recites “a first channel defined into the padding,” “disposed in the second recess of the padding,” and “a passageway to receive the wire from the padding.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the padding.” Because the claim designates the recited element as a “first padding,” the subsequent references to “the padding” without the “first” designator render it unclear whether the claim requires a single padding or contemplates a further, unrecited padding to which the later limitations are directed.
Claim 10 recites “wherein the processor is configured to recalibrate the temperature reading based on a preprogrammed data set indicative of an expected temperature deviation.” Claim 12 further recites “the preprogrammed data set indicative of the expected temperature deviation.” This limitation is indefinite because the claim does not identify the two quantities between which the recited deviation is expected. A deviation is necessarily a difference between two values, and the metes and bounds of the recited “preprogrammed data set” cannot be determined without knowing what those values are. The ambiguity is not resolved by the remainder of claim 10 but is instead compounded by it: claim 10 recites both that the sensor is configured to detect “a temperature within the dewar” and that the recalibration converts the sensor reading to “an actual temperature of a payload area of the dewar.” It is therefore unclear whether the expected temperature deviation is a deviation between the temperature reading and the temperature within the dewar, a deviation between the temperature reading and the actual temperature of the payload area, or a deviation between some other pair of quantities. These are not the same, because the claim itself distinguishes the temperature within the dewar from the temperature of the payload area of the dewar. The specification describes a deviation between a temperature reading taken at the vapor plug and a temperature reading at the payload area (¶¶ 0034-0035, 0050, 0054), but the claim is not so limited and does not adopt that referent. Appropriate correction is required. Reciting the two quantities between which the deviation is expected — for example, an expected temperature deviation between the temperature reading and the actual temperature of the payload area of the dewar — would appear to obviate this rejection.
Claim 21 recites “wherein the temperature detected by the sensor includes a deviation from an actual payload area temperature,” and “wherein the electronic device is configured to recalibrate the temperature detected by the sensor to convert the temperature detected by the sensor to the actual payload area temperature.” These limitations are indefinite for two reasons. First, claim 21 is directed to a vapor plug per se and does not positively recite a dewar, a payload area, or a payload; the neck is merely recited as “insertable into a dewar.” It is therefore unclear what structure defines the “payload area” whose temperature the recalibration must produce, and whether the dewar and its payload area are intended to be part of the claimed combination. Second, the recitation that “the temperature detected by the sensor includes a deviation from an actual payload area temperature” states a condition of the thermal environment in which the vapor plug happens to be placed rather than a structural characteristic of the claimed vapor plug, and it is unclear whether and how this recitation further limits the apparatus. See MPEP § 2173.05(g) and § 2115.
Claims 3-5, 8-9, 12, 13 and 15 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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 1, 3, 5, 8, 9, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over McCormick (US 2019/0063688) in view of Kimoto et al. (US 6,610,439) and further in view of Pugh et al. (US 2020/0386444).
In regard to claim 1, McCormick teaches a system for recalibrating a temperature reading of a dewar (cryogenic container or dewar 18), comprising:
a vapor plug (closure 10), comprising:
a vapor plug cover (head 14 at least partly formed by shell 66) comprising a circular lid of the vapor plug (10) having a first recess (cavity 68 formed between the shell 66 and the top wall 40 of the body 12) defined into a center of the vapor plug cover (14), the first recess (68) having a first shape (¶¶ 0023, 0030, 0041-0042; figs. 1, 2);
a neck (body 12) extending from the vapor plug cover (14) and away from the first recess (68), the neck (12) configured to be inserted into an opening (open end 24) of the dewar (18) (¶¶ 0023, 0025-0026, 0030; figs. 1, 2);
a sensor (74) positioned on the neck (12) at an end (free end 50) of the neck (12) opposite the vapor plug cover (14), the sensor (74) configured to detect at least one parameter (temperature of the storage cavity 20) associated with the dewar (18) (¶¶ 0044-0045; fig. 2);
a padding (shell 66, formed from a molded polymeric foam material) disposed in the first recess (68) and having a shape corresponding to the first shape, wherein the padding (66) has a second recess (70) defined into the padding (66) and the second recess (70) has a second shape that has a smaller volume than has the first shape (¶¶ 0041-0042; figs. 1, 2);
the padding (66) further including a padding channel (the aperture through which the electrical connection 76 passes into the cavity 68 and the recess 70 to reach the electronic device 60) extending from the second recess (70) to receive a wire (electrical connection 76) (¶¶ 0041, 0045; fig. 2);
an electronic device (60) having a third shape corresponding to the second shape and disposed in the second recess (70) of the padding (66), the electronic device (60) being in communication with the sensor (74) by the wire (76) connecting the electronic device (60) to the sensor (74), the electronic device (60) configured to receive and transmit the at least one parameter from the sensor (74) (¶¶ 0039-0041, 0044, 0047; fig. 2);
wherein the vapor plug (10) comprises a channel (the aligned apertures extending through the hollow portion 44 of the body 12 and through each of the super-insulating panels 36) disposed through the vapor plug (10), the channel extending through the vapor plug cover (14) and the neck (12), and
wherein the channel comprises a passageway to receive the wire (76) from the padding channel and the electronic device (60) in the second recess (70) of the padding (66) (¶¶ 0031-0033, 0041, 0045; figs. 1, 2).
McCormick does not explicitly teach that the channel comprises a wire storage cavity defined into the neck adjacent to the vapor plug cover and having a larger cross section than the passageway, the wire storage cavity configured to receive excess of the wire.
However, Kimoto teaches a battery case (3) formed of case bodies (4) whose upper open ends are closed integrally by a lid member (5), the lid member (5) having a temperature detection hole (12) formed therein that receives a temperature sensor (13) having a sensing element (17) at its lower end, wherein the sensor case (16) received in the lid member (5) comprises a small-diameter portion (16b) at its lower end that closely receives the sensing element (17) and the leads (19) and thereby forms a passageway, and a portion of larger cross section above the tapered guide wall (16c) that receives the leads (19) and the wires (20) coupled to the sensing element (17), and further teaches a wire-holding hook (23) that holds the wires (20) so that stress is not concentrated at the ends of the wires (20) led out from the temperature sensor (13) and the wires are prevented from rupturing (col. 4, l. 61 – col. 5, l. 13; figs. 3-7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the channel of McCormick to comprise a wire storage cavity defined into the neck adjacent to the vapor plug cover and having a larger cross section than the passageway, and configured to receive excess of the wire, as taught by Kimoto, in order to prevent stress from concentrating at the ends of the wires led out from the temperature sensor and thereby prevent the wires from rupturing (Kimoto, col. 4, l. 61 – col. 5, l. 13; figs. 3, 4). One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because McCormick routes the electrical connection 76 through apertures in the super-insulating panels that are each approximately the same size as the wire in order to minimize creation of a thermal leak path (¶ 0045), such that any slack in the wire must be accommodated elsewhere within the closure if the tight-fitting apertures are to be preserved and the wire is not to be strained during assembly and handling. See MPEP § 2143(I)(C).
The modified McCormick in view of Kimoto does not explicitly teach that the electronic device is configured to recalibrate the at least one parameter from the sensor, wherein the recalibration converts the sensor reading to an actual temperature of a payload area of the dewar.
However, Pugh teaches a thermal system comprising a controller (260) in communication with a temperature sensor (274), wherein the temperature sensor (274) is mounted on or adjacent to a conduit line so as to measure heat conducted through the wall of the conduit line rather than being positioned at the location whose temperature is of interest, and wherein the temperature sensor (274) or the controller (260) uses a correction factor, based on prior testing and calibration, to convert between the measured temperature as recorded by the sensor (274) and an actual temperature of the fluid at the evaporator coil (120), that is, at the location of interest (¶ 0058; fig. 6). Pugh further teaches that the controller (260) is a programmable logic controller, processor, or other computer that executes computer-executable instructions and communicates with the temperature sensors of the system (¶¶ 0054-0055; fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electronic device (60) of McCormick to recalibrate the parameter received from the sensor (74) by applying a correction factor based on prior testing and calibration, so that the recalibration converts the sensor reading to an actual temperature of the payload area (storage cavity 20) of the dewar (18), as taught by Pugh, in order to convert a temperature recorded by a sensor that is not located at the point of interest into the actual temperature at that point (Pugh, ¶ 0058). One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because McCormick deploys the sensor at the free end of the closure body rather than within the payload itself, while seeking to monitor the temperature of the storage cavity over time for real-time transmission to a cloud-based database, for later retrieval of a temperature-time profile of the storage cavity, and to provide the user with payload temperature information (¶¶ 0044-0045, 0048), such that correcting the closure-mounted reading to report the actual storage cavity temperature directly serves the monitoring purpose McCormick identifies. See MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
With respect to the recitation that the payload area is configured to receive a payload and maintain a temperature of an environment surrounding the payload, McCormick teaches that the dewar (18) includes a closable storage cavity (20) configured to contain a cryogenic liquid within the storage cavity and within porous walls at least partially surrounding the storage cavity, and that the closure (10) maintains the cryogenic temperatures within the dewar (18) for continued cryogenic storage of the material stored therein, including life science products kept at cryogenic temperatures to maintain post-thaw viability (¶¶ 0002, 0023-0024, 0038; figs. 1, 2).
In regard to claim 3, McCormick teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one parameter is at least one of humidity and temperature within a payload area (storage cavity 20) of the dewar (18), McCormick teaching that the sensor (74) comprises a temperature sensor used to monitor the temperature of the storage cavity (20) of the container (18) over time (¶¶ 0008, 0040, 0044; fig. 2).
In regard to claim 5, McCormick teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the electronic device (60) is a data logger configured to receive, store, and transmit data from the sensor (74), McCormick teaching that the electronic device (60) includes a data-logger capable of storing information generated by the sensor over time and a wireless transmitter or transceiver for transmitting that information to an external receiver (¶¶ 0007, 0039-0040, 0044, 0047; fig. 2).
In regard to claim 8, McCormick teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the wire (76) secured in the channel is configured to electronically couple the electronic device (60) and at least one of (i) a sensor controller connected to the sensor or (ii) the sensor (74), McCormick teaching that an electrical connection (76) extends through the hollow portion (44) of the body (12) between the electronic device (60) and the sensor (74) (¶ 0045; fig. 2).
In regard to claim 9, McCormick teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising a display coupled to the electronic device (60), McCormick teaching that the electronic device (60) provides information pertinent to a condition of the storage container to a user, including by transmission to a computer or computer network for display (¶¶ 0039-0040, 0048).
McCormick does not explicitly teach that the display is configured to receive the recalibrated parameter from the electronic device and to display the recalibrated parameter.
However, Pugh teaches that output is supplied by the control system to output devices including displays, whether cathode ray tube, liquid crystal display, light emitting diode, or plasma, by which the control system directs outputs to the components with which it communicates (¶ 0056), the value so output being the corrected temperature obtained by application of the correction factor (¶ 0058).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of McCormick to display the recalibrated parameter on a display coupled to the electronic device, as taught by Pugh, in order to direct the corrected output of the controller to a display for observation (Pugh, ¶¶ 0056, 0058).
In regard to claim 21, McCormick teaches a vapor plug (closure 10), comprising:
a vapor plug cover (head 14 at least partly formed by shell 66) comprising a circular lid of the vapor plug (10), wherein the vapor plug cover (14) has a first recess (cavity 68) defined into a center of the vapor plug cover (14), wherein the first recess (68) has a first shape (¶¶ 0030, 0041-0042; figs. 1, 2);
a neck (body 12) extending from the vapor plug cover (14) and away from the first recess (68), the neck (12) insertable into a dewar (18) (¶¶ 0023, 0025-0026; figs. 1, 2);
a sensor (74) positioned on an end (free end 50) of the neck (12) farthest from the vapor plug cover (14), wherein the sensor (74) detects a temperature (¶¶ 0044-0045; fig. 2);
a first padding (shell 66, formed from a molded polymeric foam material) disposed in the first recess (68), wherein the first padding (66) has a second shape corresponding to the first shape, wherein the first padding (66) has a second recess (70) defined into the first padding (66), wherein the second recess (70) has a third shape, wherein the third shape has a smaller volume than has the first shape (¶¶ 0041-0042; figs. 1, 2);
a first channel (the aperture through which the electrical connection 76 passes into the cavity 68 and the recess 70) defined into the padding (66) and extending from the second recess (70) to receive a wire (76) (¶¶ 0041, 0045; fig. 2);
an electronic device (60) having a fourth shape corresponding to the third shape and disposed in the second recess (70) of the padding (66), wherein the electronic device (60) is in communication with the sensor (74) by the wire (76) connecting the electronic device (60) to the sensor (74), wherein the electronic device (60) receives the temperature from the sensor (74) (¶¶ 0039-0041, 0044; fig. 2);
wherein the vapor plug (10) comprises a second channel (the aligned apertures extending through the hollow portion 44 of the body 12 and through each of the super-insulating panels 36) disposed through the vapor plug (10), the second channel extending through the vapor plug cover (14) and the neck (12), and
wherein the second channel comprises a passageway to receive the wire (76) from the padding (66) and the electronic device (60) in the second recess (70) of the padding (66) (¶¶ 0031-0033, 0045; figs. 1, 2).
McCormick does not explicitly teach a wire storage cavity defined into the neck adjacent to the vapor plug cover and having a larger cross section than the passageway, wherein the wire storage cavity receives an excess of the wire. This limitation is taught by Kimoto and rendered obvious in combination with McCormick for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above, which reasoning is incorporated here by reference.
The modified McCormick in view of Kimoto does not explicitly teach that the temperature detected by the sensor includes a deviation from an actual payload area temperature, or that the electronic device is configured to recalibrate the temperature detected by the sensor to convert the temperature detected by the sensor to the actual payload area temperature.
However, Pugh teaches that where a temperature sensor (274) is mounted on or adjacent to a conduit line so as to measure heat conducted through the conduit wall rather than being positioned at the location of interest, the temperature as recorded by the sensor (274) differs from the actual temperature at the location of interest, such that a correction factor based on prior testing and calibration is used by the sensor (274) or the controller (260) to convert between the measured temperature and the actual temperature of the fluid at the evaporator coil (120) (¶ 0058; fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electronic device (60) of McCormick to recalibrate the temperature detected by the sensor (74) so as to convert that temperature to the actual payload area temperature, as taught by Pugh, in order to convert a temperature recorded by a sensor that is not located at the point of interest into the actual temperature at that point (Pugh, ¶ 0058). One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above, namely that McCormick locates the sensor (74) at the free end (50) of the closure rather than within the payload while seeking to report the temperature of the storage cavity (20) and the payload temperature to the user (¶¶ 0044-0045, 0048). See MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Claims 10, 12, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over McCormick in view of Kimoto and Pugh et al. (US 2020/0386444), and further in view of Opfermann (US 2020/0209074).
In regard to claim 10, McCormick teaches a vapor plug system, comprising:
a vapor plug (closure 10) configured to at least partially seal a dewar (18), the vapor plug (10) comprising a vapor plug cover (head 14 at least partly formed by shell 66) and a neck (body 12), the vapor plug cover (14) comprising a lid of the vapor plug (10) having a first recess (cavity 68) defined into the vapor plug cover (14), the first recess (68) having a first shape, and the neck (12) comprising a member extending from the vapor plug cover (14) and away from the first recess (68), the neck (12) configured to be inserted into an opening (open end 24) of the dewar (18) and the vapor plug cover (14) being disposed outside of the dewar (18) and adjacent to the opening (24) (¶¶ 0023, 0025-0026, 0030, 0041-0042; figs. 1, 2);
a sensor (74) coupled to the vapor plug (10) on the neck (12) of the vapor plug (10), the sensor (74) configured to detect a temperature within the dewar (18) (¶¶ 0044-0045; fig. 2);
an electronic device (60) comprising a processor (computer processor of the electronic device 60) operatively coupled to the sensor (74), the processor configured to receive, from the sensor (74), a temperature reading of the dewar (18) (¶¶ 0039-0040, 0044-0045; fig. 2);
a padding (shell 66, formed from a molded polymeric foam material) disposed in the first recess (68) and having a shape corresponding to the first recess (68), wherein the padding (66) defines a second recess (70), wherein the electronic device (60) is disposed in the second recess (70) (¶¶ 0041-0042; figs. 1, 2);
wherein the vapor plug (10) comprises a channel (the aligned apertures extending through the hollow portion 44 of the body 12 and through each of the super-insulating panels 36) disposed through the vapor plug (10), the channel extending from the first recess (68) and through the vapor plug cover (14) and the neck (12), and
wherein the channel comprises a passageway to receive a wire (electrical connection 76), the wire (76) coupled to the sensor (74) (¶¶ 0031-0033, 0041, 0045; figs. 1, 2).
McCormick does not explicitly teach a wire storage cavity defined into the neck adjacent to the vapor plug cover and having a larger cross section than the passageway, the wire storage cavity configured to receive excess of the wire, the wire passing from the sensor then into the passageway then into the wire storage cavity then into the first recess and then into the second recess, in that order, and connected to the electronic device.
However, Kimoto teaches the wire storage cavity as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above, namely a sensor case (16) received in the lid member (5) comprising a small-diameter portion (16b) at its lower end that closely receives the sensing element (17) and the leads (19) and thereby forms a passageway, and a portion of larger cross section above the tapered guide wall (16c) that receives the leads (19) and the wires (20) coupled to the sensing element (17), together with a wire-holding hook (23) holding the wires (20) so that stress is not concentrated at the ends of the wires and the wires are prevented from rupturing (col. 4, l. 61 – col. 5, l. 13; figs. 3-7). In Kimoto, the wire extends from the sensing element (17) at the lower end, through the small-diameter passageway (16b), into the enlarged portion above the tapered guide wall (16c), and thence out of the sensor case (16) toward the wire-holding hook (23), that is, in the order recited.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the channel of McCormick to comprise a wire storage cavity defined into the neck adjacent to the vapor plug cover and having a larger cross section than the passageway, with the wire passing from the sensor into the passageway, then into the wire storage cavity, then into the first recess and then into the second recess in that order to connect to the electronic device, as taught by Kimoto, in order to prevent stress from concentrating at the ends of the wires led out from the temperature sensor and thereby prevent the wires from rupturing (Kimoto, col. 4, l. 61 – col. 5, l. 13; figs. 3, 4). One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because McCormick already routes the electrical connection (76) from the sensor (74) at the free end (50) of the body (12), through the tightly fitted apertures in the super-insulating panels (36), and into the cavity (68) and recess (70) housing the electronic device (60), such that the recited order follows directly from the existing routing of McCormick once the enlarged cavity of Kimoto is introduced along that path (¶¶ 0041, 0045; fig. 2). See MPEP § 2143(I)(C).
The modified McCormick in view of Kimoto does not explicitly teach that the processor is configured to recalibrate the temperature reading, to display the recalibrated temperature reading, or that the recalibration converts the sensor reading to an actual temperature of a payload area of the dewar.
However, Pugh teaches a controller (260) comprising a programmable logic controller, processor, or other computer executing computer-executable instructions, in communication with a temperature sensor (274) that is mounted on or adjacent to a conduit line so as to measure heat conducted through the conduit wall rather than being positioned at the location whose temperature is of interest, wherein the temperature sensor (274) or the controller (260) uses a correction factor, based on prior testing and calibration, to convert between the measured temperature as recorded by the sensor (274) and an actual temperature of the fluid at the evaporator coil (120), and wherein output is supplied by the control system to output devices including liquid crystal, light emitting diode, and plasma displays (¶¶ 0054-0056, 0058; fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the processor of McCormick to recalibrate the temperature reading so that the recalibration converts the sensor reading to an actual temperature of the payload area (storage cavity 20) of the dewar (18), and to display the recalibrated temperature reading, as taught by Pugh, in order to convert a temperature recorded by a sensor that is not located at the point of interest into the actual temperature at that point and to direct that corrected value to a display (Pugh, ¶¶ 0056, 0058). One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because McCormick locates the sensor (74) at the free end (50) of the closure rather than within the payload, while expressly seeking to monitor the temperature of the storage cavity (20) over time and to provide the user with payload temperature information (¶¶ 0044-0045, 0048).
The modified McCormick in view of Kimoto and Pugh does not explicitly teach that the processor is configured to recalibrate the temperature reading based on a preprogrammed data set indicative of an expected temperature deviation.
However, Opfermann teaches a calibration arrangement in which a temperature sensor (10) connected to a temperature measuring unit (12) is brought successively to a plurality of known calibration temperatures (levels I, II, III) by a temperature calibrator (11), the temperature value (13) reported by the measuring unit (12) at each level is detected and transmitted to a storage medium (16) in the temperature calibrator (11), and the reported temperature values are stored in association with the respective known calibration temperatures so that the deviation between the reported value and the known actual temperature at each level may be determined and a corresponding correction may be made (¶¶ 0010, 0015, 0018-0019, 0030-0031; figs. 1-3). Opfermann further teaches that the extent of the reported temperature value deviates from the extent of the calibration temperature across the temperature levels (¶ 0031; fig. 3), and that the stored values document the calibration history of the temperature sensor and measuring unit for later use on a subsequent calibration (¶¶ 0010, 0030).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the processor of the modified McCormick to recalibrate the temperature reading based on a preprogrammed data set indicative of an expected temperature deviation, as taught by Opfermann, in order to establish and retain the deviation between the reported temperature value and the known actual temperature across a plurality of temperature levels so that the correction may be applied over the operating range rather than at a single point (Opfermann, ¶¶ 0018-0019, 0030-0031; fig. 3). One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because Pugh already teaches that the correction factor applied by the controller is derived from prior testing and calibration (¶ 0058), and Opfermann supplies the corresponding prior testing and calibration in the form of stored reported-versus-known temperature values, such that the combination amounts to the use of a known technique to obtain the calibration data that the modified McCormick already requires.
Applicant is advised that this rejection is applied to claim 10 as best understood in view of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), set forth above.
In regard to claim 12, McCormick teaches the vapor plug system of claim 10, McCormick teaching that the electronic device (60) includes a data-logger capable of storing information generated by the sensor over time (¶¶ 0007, 0040, 0044).
McCormick does not explicitly teach a memory configured to store the preprogrammed data set indicative of the expected temperature deviation.
However, Pugh teaches a control system memory in communication with the controller (260) that stores values used by the controller in evaluating sensor signals, and further teaches that the controller memory may store a table associating ranges of sensed temperatures with corresponding control values as determined by system testing (¶¶ 0057, 0059). Opfermann likewise teaches a storage medium (16) integrated in the temperature calibrator (11) in which the detected temperature values are stored in association with the respective calibration temperatures (¶¶ 0010, 0030; figs. 1, 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of the modified McCormick to include a memory configured to store the preprogrammed data set indicative of the expected temperature deviation, as taught by Pugh and Opfermann, in order to make the calibration data available to the processor at the time of measurement (Pugh, ¶¶ 0057, 0059) and to retain that data for subsequent use (Opfermann, ¶¶ 0010, 0030). One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because the electronic device (60) of McCormick already comprises a data-logger and computer processor that store and process information generated by the sensor over time (¶¶ 0040, 0044).
In regard to claim 13, McCormick teaches the vapor plug system of claim 10, wherein the electronic device (60) is a data logger configured to receive, store, and transmit data from the sensor (74), McCormick teaching that the electronic device (60) includes a data-logger capable of storing information generated by the sensor over time and a wireless transmitter or transceiver for transmitting that information to an external receiver (¶¶ 0007, 0039-0040, 0044, 0047; fig. 2).
In regard to claim 15, McCormick teaches the vapor plug system of claim 10, wherein the channel is disposed through both (i) the vapor plug cover (14) and (ii) the neck (12), the electrical connection (76) extending from the sensor (74) at the free end (50) of the body (12) through the hollow portion (44) and the apertures in the super-insulating panels (36) to the electronic device (60) housed where the body (12) and head (14) are joined (¶¶ 0041, 0045; fig. 2). McCormick further teaches that the fluid passage (46) of the closure (10) is located along a central axis A of the closure, coaxial with the body (12) and the head (14), and entirely within the perimeter of the body (12) (¶¶ 0031-0033; fig. 2).
McCormick does not explicitly teach that the wire-receiving channel is disposed through a center of both the vapor plug cover and the neck.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have located the wire-receiving channel of McCormick through the center of both the vapor plug cover (14) and the neck (12), as claimed. The particular placement of a passage through a circular cover and a coaxial cylindrical neck — whether at the periphery or at the center — is a rearrangement of parts that does not modify the operation of the device, both locations providing a path for the sensor wire to extend through the vapor plug cover and the neck to the electronic device. Absent a showing of criticality or unexpected results, such a rearrangement is within the level of ordinary skill. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C). One of ordinary skill would further have been motivated to adopt the central location because McCormick expressly places the analogous fluid passage (46) along the central axis A of the closure and teaches that the central location contributes to the dynamic performance of the closure (¶¶ 0033, 0035).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over McCormick in view of Kimoto and Pugh as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bollinger (US 2020/0003367).
In regard to claim 4, McCormick teaches the system of claim 1, McCormick teaching that the sensor (74) may include a temperature sensor used to monitor the temperature of the storage cavity (20) of the container (18) over time (¶¶ 0040, 0044; fig. 2).
McCormick does not explicitly teach that the sensor is a thermocouple.
However, Bollinger teaches a vapor plug (100) for partially sealing an opening of a dewar (202), the vapor plug (100) comprising a neck (104) having a thermocouple channel (114) that allows a lead wire of a thermocouple to exit the dewar (202), wherein the thermocouple is an electronic device or sensor that measures and monitors the temperature within the dewar (202) and provides the temperature to another electronic device such as a smart data logger (¶¶ 0009, 0039; figs. 1A, 1B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the temperature sensor (74) of McCormick to be a thermocouple, as taught by Bollinger, in order to measure and monitor the temperature within the dewar and provide that temperature to a smart data logger (Bollinger, ¶ 0039). The substitution of a thermocouple — an art-recognized temperature sensor — for the generic temperature sensor of McCormick is a simple substitution of one known element for another yielding predictable results. See MPEP § 2143(I)(B).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEBESHET MENGESHA whose telephone number is (571)270-1793. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7-4, alternate Fridays, EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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.
/W.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights