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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “104” has been used to designate both “the controller” (paragraph [0051] as filed) and “electromechanical actuator” (paragraph [0052] as filed). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 3, 6 – 16, 19 – 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0217833 A1 to Davis et al. (hereinafter “Davis”)
Regarding Claim 1, Davis teaches a probe (see acoustic based air probe 101 of an AIRtracTM sensor 100, Figs. 1a – 1e, see paragraphs [0008], [0009]) for monitoring fresh concrete received in a drum of a fresh concrete mixer (see abstract, paragraphs [0004], [0008] describing technique for sensing parameters of concrete in a drum using the AIRtracTM sensor 100 which includes an acoustic based air probe like element 101 including an acoustic source 102 and an acoustic receiver 104), the probe (101) comprising:
an electromechanical actuator (see acoustic source 102 including a piston 122, a piston shaft 126, a vibration isolated actuator block assembly 128 having a stationary voice coil actuator filed assembly 130 in combination with a voice coil actuator field assembly 132, see paragraphs [0009], [0013] which states “The vibration isolated actuator block assembly 128 may be configured to drive and vibrate the piston shaft 126, consistent with that shown in FIG. 1d, so as to provide the acoustic signal to the mixture of the concrete when the acoustic-based air probe is inserted into the mixture”) having a frame (see arrangement at Fig. 1D illustrating components that support the acoustic source 102 and the vibration isolated actuator block assembly 128, which includes for instance the piston module assembly 120, low durometer cast silicone rubber 123, the planar probing surface 106, etc. see paragraphs [0009], [0013], see also paragraphs [0099], [0147] describing the sensor having a sensor housing, hence reading on the invention as claimed) mounted within the drum (see paragraph [0013] which describes the air probe being inserted into the concrete mixture, see also Figs. 2, 6, 7, 9 illustrating the probe i.e., AIRtracTM sensor which includes the probes, inserted within the drum of the concrete mixer, see also paragraphs [0095] – [0096], [0147]) and a moving element (see hardened steel piston 122, Fig. 1D) actuatably mounted to the frame (see arrangement at Fig. 1D), the moving element (122) having a fresh concrete interface exposed within said drum (see arrangement at Fig. 1D, which illustrates an interface region at an end portion of the piston 122 since the piston is used to provide an acoustic signal to the mixture of the concrete when the probe is inserted into the mixture as described at paragraph [0013]) and experiencing a resistance to movement within said drum upon actuation of the electromechanical actuator with an electrical signal (see paragraph [0013] stating “The acoustic source 102 may also include a vibration isolated actuator block assembly 128, best identified in FIG. 1b, having a stationary voice coil actuator field assembly 130 in combination with a voice coil actuator field assembly 132 having an accelerometer transducer configuration. The vibration isolated actuator block assembly 128 may be configured to drive and vibrate the piston shaft 126, consistent with that shown in FIG. 1d, so as to provide the acoustic signal to the mixture of the concrete when the acoustic-based air probe is inserted into the mixture”, hence by using the voice coil actuators as described above, the assembly uses electrical signals as claimed); and
a measurement unit measuring a resistance response during said actuation (see acoustic receiver 104, Fig. 1e which are for instance in a form of a dynamic pressure transducer as described at paragraphs [0010], [0016], see also paragraph [0089] stating “This is accomplished by using a piston to “pulse” the concrete and measuring the amount of time it takes for the pulse to travel through the concrete and be detected by a pressure transducer that is known distance away from the piston, e.g., consistent with that set forth above” and paragraph [0092] which states “A second detection technique can utilize the magnitude of the acoustic signal the pressure sensor sees as it is generated by the piston. Air is highly attenuative to acoustic waves so when the AIRtrac™ is in air the pressure transducer will see very little of the acoustic energy generated by the piston, while once the sensor is in the concrete the signal level will rise dramatically”) and generating a response signal based on said measured resistance response (see paragraphs [0020] – [0022], [0027] – [0028] describing the signal processor that is configured to receive the acoustic sensor signaling and determine corresponding signaling containing information about a slump characteristic of the concrete mixture based upon the received signal), the generated response signal comprising monitoring information concerning the fresh concrete within the drum, if any (see paragraphs [0020] – [0022], [0027] – [0028] describing the signal processor that is configured to receive the acoustic sensor signaling and determine corresponding signaling containing information about a slump characteristic of the concrete mixture based upon the received signal, see also paragraphs [0139] – [0143] and Fig. 20 illustrating the system having a sensor and a signal processor for determining characteristics of the concrete within the drum, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Insofar as Davis may be construed as not explicitly teaching the invention as described above (i.e., related to Figs. 1a – 1E, 2, 6, 7, 9, 20) in a single embodiment, Davis teaches that the invention is not limited to the disclosed embodiments and modifications may be made to adapt a particular situation without departing from the scope of the invention as described at paragraph [0159].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the different embodiments in combination, since Davis does indicate that various changes and modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the invention (see paragraph [0159]).
Regarding Claim 16, Davis teaches a method of monitoring fresh concrete received in a drum of a fresh concrete mixer (see abstract, paragraphs [0004], [0008] describing technique for sensing parameters of concrete in a rotating container or a drum, see Fig. 2 illustrating the concrete mixer truck), the method comprising:
exposing a fresh concrete interface within said drum (see arrangement at Fig. 1D, which illustrates an interface region at an end portion of the piston 122 since the piston is used to provide an acoustic signal to the mixture of the concrete when the probe is inserted into the mixture as described at paragraph [0013]);
mechanically coupling a moving element (see hardened steel piston 122, Fig. 1d, see paragraph [0013] stating “The rigid hardened steel piston 122 is enclosed, surrounded and configured to move in relation to a low durometer cast silicone rubber 123 and photo-etched flexures 127, so as to provide the floating mass aspect of the acoustic source 102”) of an electromechanical actuator (see acoustic source 102 including a piston 122, a piston shaft 126, a vibration isolated actuator block assembly 128 having a stationary voice coil actuator filed assembly 130 in combination with a voice coil actuator field assembly 132, see paragraphs [0009], [0013] which states “The vibration isolated actuator block assembly 128 may be configured to drive and vibrate the piston shaft 126, consistent with that shown in FIG. 1d, so as to provide the acoustic signal to the mixture of the concrete when the acoustic-based air probe is inserted into the mixture”) to said fresh concrete interface (see arrangement at Fig. 1d and paragraph [0013]);
actuating the electromechanical actuator with an electrical signal, said actuating including moving said moving element relative to the fresh concrete interface, said moving element thereby experiencing a resistance to movement via said fresh concrete interface (see paragraph [0013] stating “The acoustic source 102 may also include a vibration isolated actuator block assembly 128, best identified in FIG. 1b, having a stationary voice coil actuator field assembly 130 in combination with a voice coil actuator field assembly 132 having an accelerometer transducer configuration. The vibration isolated actuator block assembly 128 may be configured to drive and vibrate the piston shaft 126, consistent with that shown in FIG. 1d, so as to provide the acoustic signal to the mixture of the concrete when the acoustic-based air probe is inserted into the mixture”, hence by using the voice coil actuators as described above, the assembly uses electrical signals as claimed);
measuring a resistance response during said actuating (see acoustic receiver 104, Fig. 1e which are for instance in a form of a dynamic pressure transducer as described at paragraphs [0010], [0016], see also paragraph [0089] stating “This is accomplished by using a piston to “pulse” the concrete and measuring the amount of time it takes for the pulse to travel through the concrete and be detected by a pressure transducer that is known distance away from the piston, e.g., consistent with that set forth above” and paragraph [0092] which states “A second detection technique can utilize the magnitude of the acoustic signal the pressure sensor sees as it is generated by the piston. Air is highly attenuative to acoustic waves so when the AIRtrac™ is in air the pressure transducer will see very little of the acoustic energy generated by the piston, while once the sensor is in the concrete the signal level will rise dramatically”) and generating a response signal based on said measured resistance response (see paragraphs [0020] – [0022], [0027] – [0028] describing the signal processor that is configured to receive the acoustic sensor signaling and determine corresponding signaling containing information about a slump characteristic of the concrete mixture based upon the received signal), the generated response signal comprising monitoring information concerning the fresh concrete within the drum, if any (see paragraphs [0020] – [0022], [0027] – [0028] describing the signal processor that is configured to receive the acoustic sensor signaling and determine corresponding signaling containing information about a slump characteristic of the concrete mixture based upon the received signal, see also paragraphs [0139] – [0143] and Fig. 20 illustrating the system having a sensor and a signal processor for determining characteristics of the concrete within the drum, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Insofar as Davis may be construed as not explicitly teaching the invention as described above (i.e., related to Figs. 1a – 1E, 2, 20) in a single embodiment, Davis teaches that the invention is not limited to the disclosed embodiments and modifications may be made to adapt a particular situation without departing from the scope of the invention as described at paragraph [0159].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the different embodiments in combination, since Davis does indicate that various changes and modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the invention (see paragraph [0159]).
Regarding Claim 2, Davis as modified above teaches wherein the frame is a housing enclosing the moving element (see for instance sensor housing at Figs. 4, 6, 7 and 9, thus the housing that supports the AIRtracTM can reasonably considered as the frame or a housing enclosing the moving element as claimed), the housing having at least a given wall with an inner side mechanically coupled to the moving element and an outer side acting as the fresh concrete interface (see for instance at Fig. 6 which illustrates a sensor system having a sensor housing that houses two AirTrac devices within, note that the sensor housing has a “given wall” with an inner side that couples the moving elements of the acoustic transmitter portions and an outer side acting as the concrete interface as illustrated by the arrows that interface the sensors, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Regarding Claim 3, Davis as modified above teaches the claimed invention except for wherein the given wall is provided in the form of a membrane having a thickness below a given thickness threshold. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a membrane having a thickness below a given thickness threshold, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Regarding Claims 6 and 19, Davis as modified above teaches wherein the measurement unit has a mechanical response sensor measuring a mechanical response of said electromechanical actuator during said actuation (see acoustic receiver 104, Fig. 1e which are for instance in a form of a dynamic pressure transducer as described at paragraphs [0010], [0016], see also paragraph [0089] stating “This is accomplished by using a piston to “pulse” the concrete and measuring the amount of time it takes for the pulse to travel through the concrete and be detected by a pressure transducer that is known distance away from the piston, e.g., consistent with that set forth above” and paragraph [0092] which states “A second detection technique can utilize the magnitude of the acoustic signal the pressure sensor sees as it is generated by the piston. Air is highly attenuative to acoustic waves so when the AIRtrac™ is in air the pressure transducer will see very little of the acoustic energy generated by the piston, while once the sensor is in the concrete the signal level will rise dramatically”, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Regarding Claims 7 and 20, Davis as modified above teaches wherein the mechanical response sensor has a position sensor measuring an amplitude value indicative of an amplitude of movement of said moving element during said actuation (see paragraph [0061] which states “The system may include a 3-axis accelerometer configured to respond to angular positions of the sensor housing assembly at given times, and provide angular position signaling containing information about the angular positions of the sensor housing assembly at the given times”, see also paragraphs [0090], [0144] and claim 38, hence reading the invention as claimed).
Regarding Claims 8 and 21, Davis as modified above teaches further comprising a controller communicatively coupled to the measurement unit (see paragraphs [0139] – [0142 describing the signal processor or processor control module 12 which may be implemented using hardware, software, firmware or a combination thereof, hence reading on the invention as claimed), the controller having a processor and a non-transitory memory having stored thereon instructions that when executed by the processor performs the step of monitoring the fresh concrete received in the drum based on said generated response signal (see paragraphs [0020] – [0022], [0027] – [0028] describing the signal processor that is configured to receive the acoustic sensor signaling and determine corresponding signaling containing information about a slump characteristic of the concrete mixture based upon the received signal, see also paragraphs [0139] – [0143] and Fig. 20 illustrating the system having a sensor and a signal processor for determining characteristics of the concrete within the drum, hence reading on the invention as claimed)
Regarding Claims 9 and 22, Davis as modified above teaches said monitoring including determining a volume of the fresh concrete inside the drum based on said resistance responses experienced during the at least the rotation of the drum (This measurement technique utilizes the fact that the AIRtrac™ sensor is submerged under the concrete for part of the drums rotation and then is out of the concrete for the remainder. In addition, the AIRtrac™ device has a 3-axis accelerometer that is used to determine the angular position of the sensor at any given time. The combination of knowing the concrete entry and exit angles along with the geometry of the drum, the volume of the concrete can be calculated. FIG. 4 shows a diagram of how this can be achieved”, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Even though Davis teaches the invention as described above, Davis may be construed as not explicitly stating wherein said actuation and measurement are performed a plurality of times during at least a rotation of the drum. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the actuation and measurements a plurality of times during at least a rotation of the drum, since it is known in the art of measurement that taking or performing actuation and measurements a plurality of times is an obvious matter of design choice by the user. The modification allows to obtain large amount of data which improves overall reliability of the system.
Regarding Claims 10 and 23, Davis as modified above teaches wherein said monitoring includes determining a rheological property of said fresh concrete, said rheological property being selected in a group of rheological properties including viscosity, yield and slump (see paragraphs [0093] – [0094] describing a second parameter of the concrete that the AIRtracTM can determine as being the viscosity and slump of the concrete).
Regarding Claims 11 and 24, Davis as modified above teaches wherein said monitoring includes determining a physical property of said fresh concrete, said physical property being selected in a group of physical properties including air content and density (see paragraphs [0078], [0089], [0099] describing the AIRtracTM sensor measuring air content, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Regarding Claim 12, Davis as modified above teaches wherein said monitoring is based on calibration data pertaining to different resistance responses as function of different properties of the fresh concrete (see paragraph [0060] stating “The slump factor processor may be configured to determine the slump response factor (FSR) based upon a calibration for various mix recipes and drum rotation speeds to provide an indicator of a real time slump in the mixture of concrete”, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Regarding Claim 13, Davis as modified above teaches wherein said electrical signal is an oscillatory electrical signal having an amplitude oscillating over time, the resistance response experienced by the fresh concrete interface oscillating over time during said actuation with said oscillatory electrical signal (see paragraphs [0048], [0097] describing the device emits a sound signal into the concrete mix at a given frequency, set of frequencies, and claim 26, therefore since the device is using certain frequencies as described above, the signal is oscillatory and hence reads on the invention as claimed).
Regarding Claim 14, Davis as modified above teaches wherein said oscillatory electrical signal has a frequency ranging between about 20 Hz and about 20 kHz (see paragraph [0011]).
Regarding Claims 15 and 26, Davis as modified above teaches wherein the fresh concrete mixer is a mixer truck (see Fig. 2 illustrating a concrete mixer truck, see paragraph [0070]).
Regarding Claim 25, Davis as modified above teaches wherein said electrical signal is an oscillatory electrical signal having an amplitude oscillating over time (see rejection of claim 13 above), said actuating including moving said moving element against the fresh concrete interface in at least a back and forth sequence (see piston 122 which is designed to be moved in at least back and forth sequence, see [0013] which further states “The vibration isolated actuator block assembly 128 may be configured to drive and vibrate the piston shaft 126, consistent with that shown in FIG. 1d, so as to provide the acoustic signal to the mixture of the concrete when the acoustic-based air probe is inserted into the mixture”, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Claim(s) 4, 5, 17, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis in view of U.S. Patent No. 10,189,159 to Wilson et al. (hereinafter “Wilson”).
Regarding Claims 4 and 17, Davis teaches the claimed invention but is silent regarding wherein the measurement unit has an electrical response sensor measuring an electrical response of said electromechanical actuator during said actuation. Davis however teaches the apparatus is configured with a signal processing technology for driving the acoustic source 102 as described at paragraph [0013] and further describes the signal processor or the signal processing module 12 and other signal processor circuits or components 14 used in the system and the functionality of the signal processor as described at paragraphs [0139] – [0143]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize the signal processor or processor control module 12 and/or other signal processor circuits or components 14, Fig. 20 of Davis as including elements/sensors for measuring electrical response of the actuator, since it is known in the art that signal processing technologies include monitoring of the driving/vibrating force/power required for the respective electrical components.
In addition, Wilson, in the field of systems for detecting states of operation of motors, teaches wherein the measurement unit has an electrical response sensor measuring an electrical response of said electromechanical actuator during said actuation (see Col. 1, lines 40 – 58 describing the system including one or more processors to cause the system to perform operations including “determining an electrical power value based on measurements of a voltage and a current associated with the motor”, see also Col. 2, line 60 – Col. 3, line 3, Col. 4, lines 3 – 24, Col. 5, lines 17 – Col. 6, line 3 and Fig. 1 illustrating the multiple components of the system including power supply 104, electric motor 144, actuators 110, computer system for controlling operation of the device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate measurement of response of motors/actuators of Wilson into Davis, in order to provide possible states of operation of the electrical components by providing power measurements taken at multiple locations of the system.
Regarding Claims 5 and 18, Davis in view of Wilson as modified above teaches wherein the electrical response sensor has an electrical power meter measuring an electrical power value indicative of an electrical power consumed by said electromechanical actuator during said actuation (see Col. 1, lines 40 – 58 describing the system including one or more processors to cause the system to perform operations including “determining an electrical power value based on measurements of a voltage and a current associated with the motor”, see also Col. 2, line 60 – Col. 3, line 3, Col. 4, lines 3 – 24, Col. 5, lines 17 – Col. 6, line 3 of Wilson).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form accompanying this office action which includes the following relevant prior art:
Beaupre et al. (U.S. No. 9,199,391 B2) teaches a probe including a base and a resistance member extending from the base and onto which a resistance pressure is imparted by a rheological substance when the resistance member is submerged and moved therein.
Johnson (U.S. No. 3,731,909) teaches meters designed for measuring the slump of concrete and utilized specifically in conjunction with mobile concrete mixers.
DiFoggio et al. (U.S. No. 7,317,989 B2) teaches an apparatus for determining the properties of a fluid downhole comprising: (a) a resonator in contact with the fluid downhole, wherein the resonator electrical impedance is responsive to properties of the fluid; (b) a controller that actuates the resonator; (c) a monitor for measuring electrical impedance of the resonator.
Beaupre (U.S. No. 2019/0242802 A1) teaches rheological probes used to measure a rheological property of a substance in which they are displaced, and has specific applications in the field of ready-mix concrete production and handling.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARRIT EYASSU whose telephone number is (571)270-1403. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 9:00AM - 6:00PM.
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, Laura E. Martin can be reached at (571) 272-2160. 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.
/MARRIT EYASSU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855