NON-FINAL 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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 14 July 2026 with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the hydraulically actuatable piston slide valve, control chamber, and one or more electromechanical valves must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
INFORMATION ON HOW TO EFFECT DRAWING CHANGES
Replacement Drawing Sheets
Drawing changes must be made by presenting replacement sheets which incorporate the desired changes and which comply with 37 CFR 1.84. An explanation of the changes made must be presented either in the drawing amendments section, or remarks, section of the amendment paper. 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). A replacement sheet must include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of the amended drawing(s) must not be labeled as “amended.” If the changes to the drawing figure(s) are not accepted by the examiner, applicant will be notified of any required corrective action in the next Office action. No further drawing submission will be required, unless applicant is notified.
Identifying indicia, if provided, should include the title of the invention, inventor’s name, and application number, or docket number (if any) if an application number has not been assigned to the application. If this information is provided, it must be placed on the front of each sheet and within the top margin.
Annotated Drawing Sheets
A marked-up copy of any amended drawing figure, including annotations indicating the changes made, may be submitted or required by the examiner. The annotated drawing sheet(s) must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheet” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings.
Timing of Corrections
Applicant is required to submit acceptable corrected drawings within the time period set in the Office action. See 37 CFR 1.85(a). Failure to take corrective action within the set period will result in ABANDONMENT of the application.
If corrected drawings are required in a Notice of Allowability (PTOL-37), the new drawings MUST be filed within the THREE MONTH shortened statutory period set for reply in the “Notice of Allowability.” Extensions of time may NOT be obtained under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136 for filing the corrected drawings after the mailing of a Notice of Allowability.
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 24-26, 28, 29, 33, 34, and 38-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3782735 (Larsson) in view of Hlavinka et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2003/0195104, hereinafter Hlavinka), and further in view of Pieralisi (U.S. Patent No. 9,968,947).
Regarding claim 24, Larsson discloses a centrifuge (centrifugal separation system 1, Fig. 1) comprising: a rotatable rotor (4, Fig. 1); and an assembly (housing 24, Fig. 1) that is stationary during operation of the centrifuge, wherein the rotatable rotor is rotatably mounted in or on the stationary assembly by one or more bearing devices (upper and lower bearings as shown in Fig. 1), wherein the rotatably rotor comprises a rotatable drum (rotor 4 is the drum, Fig. 1), a drive element (electric motor 22, Fig. 1) for rotating the drum, one or more electrical loads (control unit 32, pressure sensors 24 and 36, Fig. 1; pressure sensor 50, Fig. 5e) arranged in the rotatable rotor, an inlet (10, Fig. 1), at least two different outlets (light phase outlet 12 and heavy phase outlet 14 and/or 42, Fig. 1 and 2), wherein a disc pack (a stack of frustoconical separation disks 16, Fig. 1) is arranged in the rotatable drum, wherein the disc pack has a stack of separating discs (separation disks 18, Fig. 1), wherein the centrifuge further comprises at least one battery electrically coupled to supply the one or more electrical loads with electrical power, wherein the at least one battery is arranged on or in the rotatable rotor (para. [0095]). Larsson further discloses that its valves (heavy phase valve 38, light phase valve 40, Fig. 1) and mechanism 44 for changing a total opening area of the nozzles (Fig. 2) are controlled by control unit 32 based on sensed process parameters during operation of the centrifugal separator (para. [0056]), but does not disclose wherein the one or more electrical loads include at least one actuator, which is an electrically actuatable control valve, and wherein the at least one battery is configured to supply electrical energy to the at least one actuator during a first operating state in which the rotatable rotor is rotating and during a second operation state in which the rotatable rotor is motionless, and wherein the rotatable drum has a hydraulically actuatable piston slide valve configured to open and close one or more solids discharge openings of the rotatable drum, wherein hydraulic fluid is dischargeable from a control chamber on or under the hydraulically actuatable piston slide valve by one or more electromechanical valves as one of the one or more electrical loads, wherein the electromechanical valves as one of the one or more electrical loads, wherein the electromechanical valves are arranged on or in the rotating drum to open the hydraulically actuatable piston slide valve.
Hlavinka discloses analogous art relating to a centrifugal separation device having a rotor (12, Fig. 1) and one or more electrical loads arranged on the rotor, including an electrically actuatable control valve (solenoid 210 used for valving of tubing line 18, Fig. 16). Hlavinka further discloses that a battery 208 is mounted on rotor 12 and is capable of supplying electrical power to the rotor-mounted electrical devices independently of a generator (para. [0088]). Unlike the generator which requires relative rotational movement between the pump assembly and rotor to produce current, the battery is not dependent on any particular rotational condition (a battery 208 could be mounted on rotor 12 without generator 202 and that such battery can be of the replaceable or the rechargeable type. Such battery could provide the necessary electricity needed for the desired electrical devices (para. [0088]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that a battery’s stored energy is available regardless of the motion of the structure to which it is fixed upon, that such a battery would supply the rotor mounted solenoid both while the rotor is rotating and while it is motionless. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the centrifuge of Larsson with a battery-powered, electrically actuatable control valve, as taught by Hlavinka, because Larsson already discloses arranging a battery on the rotor to power its on-board electrical loads, and Hlavinka discloses that the same type of on-board, rotor mounted battery arrangement is suitable to power an electrically actuated valve (solenoid 210) as one of the rotor’s electrical loads. Extending Larsson’s battery arrangement to additionally power a valve as taught by Hlavinka, constitutes to applying a known technique (Hlavinka’s battery powered actuation of a rotor mounted valve) to a known device (Larson’s centrifuge) to yield predictable results of a valve that is powered from the same on-board power source. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007); see also MPEP § 2143, Exemplary Rationale D.
The combination of Larsson and Hlavinka does not disclose the hydraulically actuatable piston side valve.
Pieralisi discloses a centrifugal separator having a rotary drum (1, Fig. 2) wherein the rotatable drum has a hydraulically actuatable piston slide valve (mobile bottom 16, Fig. 4) configured to open and close one or more solids discharge openings (outlet U3, Fig. 4) of the rotatable drum, wherein hydraulic fluid is dischargeable from a control chamber (air space 62, Fig. 4) on or under the hydraulically actuatable piston slide valve by one or more electromechanical valves (closing device 4a, Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the centrifuge of the combination of Larsson and Hlavinka with the hydraulically actuatable piston slide valve and control chamber discharge arrangement of Pieralisi for the purpose of providing a closing system to close/open the sold sediments outlet that is efficient, effective and reliable (col. 4 lines 10-12, Pieralisi). It would have been also obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the electromagnetic actuation of Pieralisi’s discharge valve with the rotor mounted battery already relied upon in the combination of Larsson and Hlavinka rather than Pieralisi’s stationary coil arrangement. Doing so would have been the substitution of one known power delivery structure (a stationary coil acting on a passive, rotor-mounted ferromagnetic element of Pieralisi) for another known power delivery structure (an on-board rotor mounted battery supplying a rotor mounted electrical load of the combination of Larsson and Hlavinka) to achieve the same predictable result of electrically controlled discharge of hydraulic fluid from a control chamber to actuate a piston slide valve. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007); see also MPEP § 2143, Exemplary Rationales B.
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses wherein the at least one battery is a rechargeable battery (para. [0088], Hlavinka).
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses wherein the at least one battery is a non-rechargeable battery (para. [0088], Hlavinka).
Regarding claim 28, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses the one or more electrical loads include a data memory 53 in the rotatable rotor or on the rotatable rotor (para. [0092] and [0095]; data memory 53 is part of the control unit 32 which can be powered by batteries, Larsson).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses wherein the one or more electrical loads are arranged in the rotatable rotor and comprise a sensor, an actuator, an initiator, a transmitting unit, a receiving unit, a transmitting and receiving unit, or a control unit (para. [0095], Larsson).
Regarding claim 33, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses wherein the rotor further comprises a data memory or a control device 32, wherein the data memory or the control device is one of the one or more electrical loads (para. [0095], Larsson).
Regarding claim 34, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses wherein the one or more electrical loads include the sensor (para. [0095], Larsson).
Regarding claim 38, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses wherein the rotatable drum has a vertical axis of rotation (vertical axis 6, Fig. 1, Larsson).
Regarding claim 39, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses wherein the rotatable drum has single or double conical configuration on an inside or an outside (Fig. 1-3, Larsson).
Regarding claim 40, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses wherein the centrifuge is configured as a disc separator (Fig. 1, Larsson) or as a solid drum screw centrifuge.
Regarding claim 41, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses wherein the one or more electrical loads include the transmitting unit, the receiving unit, or the transmitting and receiving unit, and wherein the transmitting unit, the receiving unit, or the transmitting and receiving unit are arranged on or in the rotatable rotor (para. [0057], [0095]; the pressure sensors communicate wirelessly with the control unit 32 via a transmitter or transceiver arranged in the rotor, Larsson).
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsson in view of Hlavinka, and further in view of Pieralisi, as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of EP 0984133 B1 (Hopper).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi discloses wherein the at least one battery is a rechargeable battery (para. [0088], Hlavinka), the centrifuge further comprising: an electrical power generating arrangement, which is configured such that electrical power is provided in the rotatable rotor (“a generator arranged in the rotor”, para. [0095], Larsson), but does not disclose a charging circuit configured to charge the rechargeable battery.
Hopper discloses a charging circuit configured to charge the rechargeable battery (Fig. 1, para. [0010], the primary power source maybe connected through the backup source to maintain it fully charged). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the centrifuge of the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, and Pieralisi with a rechargeable battery as taught by Hopper for the purpose of ensuring that whenever there is a loss of primary power, the backup source will always be fully charged (para. [0010], Hopper).
Claims 31 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsson in view of Hlavinka, further in view of Pieralisi, and further in view of Hopper, as applied to claim 30 above, and further in view of EP 3415239 (Larsson, hereinafter Larsson ‘239).
Regarding claim 31, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, Pieralisi and Hopper does not disclose wherein the electrical power generating arrangement is configured to generate electrical power only during part of revolutions of the rotatable.
Larsson ‘239 discloses wherein the electrical power generating arrangement is configured to generate electrical power only during part of revolutions of the rotatable (para. [0003]). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the centrifuge of the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, Pieralisi and Hopper with the electrical power generating arrangement disclosed by Larsson ‘239 for the purpose of supplying power to an active electronic circuit adapted to store measurement values that are recorded during at least a portion of a revolution of rotor, before said transmission of corresponding measurement signals to the measuring unit (para. [0003], Larsson ‘239).
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, Pieralisi and Hopper does not specifically disclose wherein the electrical power generating arrangement is configured to generate electrical power during the complete revolutions of the rotatable rotor.
Larsson ‘239 discloses wherein the electrical power generating arrangement is configured to generate electrical power during the complete revolutions of the rotatable rotor (para. [0007]). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the centrifuge of the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, Pieralisi and Hopper with the electrical power generating arrangement taught by Larsson ‘239 for the purpose of continuously generating a current with the generator during a full revolution of the rotor arrangement and providing the user of electric energy stable operating conditions (para. [0007], Larsson ‘239).
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsson in view of Hlavinka, and further in view of Pieralisi, as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Zurbruggen (U.S. Patent No. 4,149,668).
Regarding claim 36, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, Pieralisi does not disclose wherein the electrically actuatable control valve is configured to change a cross-section of one or more solids discharge openings of the rotatable drum.
Zurbruggen discloses analogous art related to a centrifugal separator, wherein an actuatable control valve (outlet valve 11, Fig. 2) is configured to change a cross-section of one or more solids discharge openings of the rotatable drum (interaction between valve piston 20 and the calibrated notch 19 in nozzle 18, col. 3 lines 22-39, col. 2 lines 8-14). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the electrically actuatable control valve of the centrifuge of the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, Pieralisi according to the adjustable outlet valve structure taught by Zurbruggen in order to permit a constant fine regulation of the nozzle cross section during operation (col. 2 lines 8-14, Zurbruggen).
Claims 42-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsson in view of Hlavinka, and further in view of Pieralisi, as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Hoang (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2017/0065985).
Regarding claim 42, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, Pieralisi discloses the transmitting unit, the receiving unit, or the transmitting and receiving unit configured for wireless communications (para. [0057], Larsson), but does not disclose wherein the transmitting unit, the receiving unit, or the transmitting and receiving unit comprises an antenna projection from the rotatable rotor.
Hoang discloses wherein the transmitting unit, the receiving unit, or the transmitting and receiving unit 3200 comprises an antenna 3337 projecting from the rotatable rotor and is configured for wireless communications (para. [0067], Fig. 20). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the centrifuge of the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, Pieralisi with the antenna of Hoang for the purpose of wirelessly communicating with the computing unit (para. [0049], Hoang).
Regarding claim 43, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, Pieralisi, and Hoang discloses a corresponding transmitting unit, receiving unit, or transmitting and receiving unit arranged on the stationary assembly and configured for wireless communication (the corresponding receiving unit that receives sensor data is part of the control unit 32, para. [0057], Larsson).
Regarding claim 44, the combination of Larsson, Hlavinka, Pieralisi, and Hoang discloses wherein the corresponding transmitting unit, receiving unit, or transmitting and receiving unit is connected to a control device that controls the centrifuge (the corresponding receiving unit that receives sensor data is part of the control unit 32; para. [0057], Larsson).
Claim 45 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsson in view of Hlavinka, and further in view of Zurbruggen and Laven (U.S. Patent No. 3,845,788).
Regarding claim 45, Larsson discloses a centrifuge (centrifugal separation system 1, Fig. 1) comprising: a rotatable rotor (4, Fig. 1); and an assembly (housing 24, Fig. 1) that is stationary during operation of the centrifuge, wherein the rotatable rotor is rotatably mounted in or on the stationary assembly by one or more bearing devices (upper and lower bearings as shown in Fig. 1), wherein the rotatably rotor comprises a rotatable drum (rotor 4 is the drum, Fig. 1), a drive element (electric motor 22, Fig. 1) for rotating the drum, one or more electrical loads (control unit 32, pressure sensors 24 and 36, Fig. 1; pressure sensor 50, Fig. 5e) arranged in the rotatable rotor, an inlet (10, Fig. 1), at least two different outlets (light phase outlet 12 and heavy phase outlet 14 and/or 42, Fig. 1 and 2), wherein a disc pack (a stack of frustoconical separation disks 16, Fig. 1) is arranged in the rotatable drum, wherein the disc pack has a stack of separating discs (separation disks 18, Fig. 1), wherein the centrifuge further comprises at least one battery electrically coupled to supply the one or more electrical loads with electrical power, wherein the at least one battery is arranged on or in the rotatable rotor (para. [0095]), and wherein the centrifuge further comprises solids discharge nozzles (42, Fig. 2). Larsson further discloses that its valves (heavy phase valve 38, light phase valve 40, Fig. 1) and mechanism 44 for changing a total opening area of the nozzles (Fig. 2) are controlled by control unit 32 based on sensed process parameters during operation of the centrifugal separator (para. [0056]), but does not disclose wherein the one or more electrical loads include at least one actuator, which is an electrically actuatable control valve, wherein the at least one battery is configured to supply electrical energy to the at least one actuator during a first operating state in which the rotatable rotor is rotating and during a second operation state in which the rotatable rotor is motionless, and wherein the electrically actuatable control valve is configured to vary a nozzle cross-section of the solids discharge nozzles, wherein the electrically actuatable control valve is an electrically adjustable nozzle needle that is movable into a passage cross-section of the solid discharge nozzles, wherein a remaining passage cross-section of the solid discharge nozzles can be varied, or an impact body that is pushed electrically adjustably in front of nozzle opening of the solids discharge nozzles to form a gap with variable gap width.
Hlavinka discloses analogous art relating to a centrifugal separation device having a rotor (12, Fig. 1) and one or more electrical loads arranged on the rotor, including an electrically actuatable control valve (solenoid 210 used for valving of tubing line 18, Fig. 16). Hlavinka further discloses that a battery 208 is mounted on rotor 12 and is capable of supplying electrical power to the rotor-mounted electrical devices independently of a generator (para. [0088]). Unlike the generator which requires relative rotational movement between the pump assembly and rotor to produce current, the battery is not dependent on any particular rotational condition (a battery 208 could be mounted on rotor 12 without generator 202 and that such battery can be of the replaceable or the rechargeable type. Such battery could provide the necessary electricity needed for the desired electrical devices (para. [0088]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that a battery’s stored energy is available regardless of the motion of the structure to which it is fixed upon, that such a battery would supply the rotor mounted solenoid both while the rotor is rotating and while it is motionless. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the centrifuge of Larsson with a battery-powered, electrically actuatable control valve, as taught by Hlavinka, because Larsson already discloses arranging a battery on the rotor to power its on-board electrical loads, and Hlavinka discloses that the same type of on-board, rotor mounted battery arrangement is suitable to power an electrically actuated valve (solenoid 210) as one of the rotor’s electrical loads. Extending Larsson’s battery arrangement to additionally power a valve as taught by Hlavinka, constitutes to applying a known technique (Hlavinka’s battery powered actuation of a rotor mounted valve) to a known device (Larson’s centrifuge) to yield predictable results of a valve that is powered from the same on-board power source. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007); see also MPEP § 2143, Exemplary Rationale D.
The combination of Larsson and Hlavinka does not disclose wherein the electrically actuatable control valve is configured to vary a nozzle cross-section of the solids discharge nozzles.
Zurbruggen discloses analogous art relating to a centrifugal separator, wherein an actuatable control valve (outlet valve 11, Fig. 2) is configured to vary a nozzle cross-section of solids discharge nozzles via a valve position 20 that is movable into a passage cross-section of a nozzle 18, wherein a remaining passage cross-section of the nozzle can be varied by the position of the piston, forming a variable gap depending on the position of the piston (col. 2 lines 9-14, col. 3 lines 22-39).
Laven discloses analogous art relating to metering a flowable material through a variable orifice, wherein the size of a valve opening formed at an outlet orifice, and thus the flow rate of material discharged from the orifice, is precisely determined by the axial positioning of a conical surface of a needle relative to the orifice, which is motor controlled (“the size of the valve opening formed a circular outlet orifice…is precisely determined by the positioning of a conical surface of a generally teardrop shaped needle that is movably axially relative to the orifice”, col. 1 lines 32-53).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the electrically actuatable control valve of the combination of Larsson and Hlavinka according to the actuatable control valve structure taught by Zurbruggen, in order to permit constant fine regulation of the nozzle cross section during operation (col. 2 lines 8-14, Zurbruggen), and to have further configured the electrical actuation of that structure as a motor driven needle movably axially relative to the discharge orifice as taught by Laven, using the on-board battery already relied upon in the combination, because both Zurbruggen’s valve piston and Laven’s needle perform the identical function of continuously varying a discharge orifice’s cross-section by axial positioning of an element relative to the orifice. Such a modification constitutes a simple substitution of Laven’s known electrical/motor driven actuation technique for Zurbruggen’s mechanically/hydraulic actuation, to achieve the predictable result of electronically controllable cross-section adjustment, which would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 47 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsson in view of Hlavinka.
Regarding claim 47, Larsson discloses a method, comprising: providing a centrifuge (centrifugal separation system 1, Fig. 1) comprising a rotatable rotor (4, Fig. 1); and an assembly (housing 24, Fig. 1) that is stationary during operation of the centrifuge, wherein the rotatable rotor is rotatably mounted in or on the stationary assembly by one or more bearing devices (upper and lower bearings as shown in Fig. 1), wherein the rotatable rotor comprises a rotatable drum (rotor 4 is the drum, Fig. 1), a drive element (electric motor 22, Fig. 1) for rotating the drum, one or more electrical loads (control unit 32, pressure sensors 24 and 36, Fig. 1; pressure sensor 50, Fig. 5e) arranged in the rotatable rotor, an inlet (10, Fig. 1), at least two different outlets (light phase outlet 12 and heavy phase outlet 14 and/or 42, Fig. 1), and wherein a disc pack (a stack of frustoconical separation disks 16, Fig. 1) is arranged in the rotatable drum, wherein the disc pack has a stack of separating discs (separation disks 18, Fig. 1), wherein the centrifuge further comprises at least one battery electrically coupled to supply the one or more electrical loads with electrical power, wherein the at least one battery is arranged on or in the rotatable rotor (the control unit 32 and sensors 34, 36, 50 may be battery powered by batteries arranged in the rotor, para. [0095]), but does not disclose wherein the one or more electrical loads include at least one actuator, which is an electrically actuatable control valve; supplying the electrical energy from the at least one battery to the at least one actuator during a first operating state in which the rotatable rotor is rotating; and supplying the electrical energy from the at least one battery to the at least one actuator during a second operation state in which the rotatable rotator is motionless.
Hlavinka discloses analogous art relating to a centrifugal separation device having a rotor (12, Fig. 1) and one or more electrical loads arranged on the rotor, including an electrically actuatable control valve (solenoid 210 used for valving of tubing line 18, Fig. 16). Hlavinka further discloses that a battery 208 is mounted on rotor 12 and is capable of supplying electrical power to the rotor-mounted electrical devices independently of a generator (para. [0088]). Unlike the generator which requires relative rotational movement between the pump assembly and rotor to produce current, the battery is not dependent on any particular rotational condition (a battery 208 could be mounted on rotor 12 without generator 202 and that such battery can be of the replaceable or the rechargeable type. Such battery could provide the necessary electricity needed for the desired electrical devices (para. [0088]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that a battery’s stored energy is available regardless of the motion of the structure to which it is fixed upon, that such a battery would supply the rotor mounted solenoid both while the rotor is rotating and while it is motionless. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the method of Larsson with a battery-powered, electrically actuatable control valve, as taught by Hlavinka, because Larsson already discloses arranging a battery on the rotor to power its on-board electrical loads, and Hlavinka discloses that the same type of on-board, rotor mounted battery arrangement is suitable to power an electrically actuated valve (solenoid 210) as one of the rotor’s electrical loads. Extending Larsson’s battery arrangement to additionally power a valve as taught by Hlavinka, constitutes applying a known technique (Hlavinka’s battery powered actuation of a rotor mounted valve) to a known method (Larson’s centrifuge) to yield predictable results of a valve that is powered from the same on-board power source. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007); see also MPEP § 2143, Exemplary Rationale D.
Regarding claim 48, the combination of Larsson and Hlavinka discloses wherein the at least one actuator opens and closes at least one of the two different outlets (heavy phase valve 38 may be a shut-off valve or a proportional valve, para. [0046], light phase valve 40 may be a shut-off valve or a proportional valve, para. [0047], the mechanism 44 may comprise a sliding element displaceable by an actuator. The slidable element is configured to be slid between at least one open nozzle position and a position in which at least one open nozzle position and a position in which at least part of at least one nozzle 42 is covered, para. [0052]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the method of Larsson with a battery-powered, electrically actuatable control valve, as taught by Hlavinka, because Larsson already discloses arranging a battery on the rotor to power its on-board electrical loads, and Hlavinka discloses that the same type of on-board, rotor mounted battery arrangement is suitable to power an electrically actuated valve as one of the rotor’s electrical loads (para. [0088], Hlavinka).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHUYI S LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-0496. The examiner can normally be reached MON - FRI 9:30AM - 2:30PM 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, Claire Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/Shuyi S. Liu/Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights