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 . 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 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.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/06/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment / Arguments
The response and amendments, filed 12/06/2025, has been entered. Claims 1, 4-28 are pending upon entry of this Amendment. The previous objections and 112 rejections are withdrawn due to amendment. Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior art rejections of claims have been fully considered and are moot as amendments necessitated new ground of rejection using new art : Sieben, US 20170131204 A1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 4-5, 11, 15-19are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sedrez 1, ( Sedrez, Paulo C., et al. "Dielectric constant of mixtures of carbon dioxide and n-dodecane between 283 K and 343 K." International Journal of Thermophysics 41 (2020): 1-16) in view of Sieben, US 20170131204 A1.
Claim 1
Sedrez in fig.1 teaches:
An apparatus for simultaneously measuring permittivity, density and temperature of a fluid test sample, the apparatus comprising:
a test cell (1 and 2, here citing as:1/2) for receiving the fluid test sample (carbon dioxide (CO2) and n-dodecane (n-C12H26)/e.g., page 3 last para), the test cell 1/2 comprising:
a density sensor (measuring density using flow meter 6: e.g., page 4 first para)
a permittivity sensor (capacitance cell section 2.2); and
a temperature sensor (shown on fig.1 and cited in page 4 2nd para).
a device (water tank 3, thermal bath 4, water jacket 7, data logger 11,computer 12, analyzer 10) to control the temperature (via data logger 10, computer 12, analyzer 10: see e.g., these parts of page 4: “vessel (2), which functions as a thermodynamic equilibrium reservoir”, “All components and tubing are thermally insulated to facilitate temperature control.” , “Data acquisition is performed by a data logging system (11) connected to a computer (12).” the temperature to be maintained in a desired temperatures 280-340K, e.g., fig.3 or Abstract) of the fluid test sample (carbon dioxide (CO2) and n-dodecane (n-C12H26)/e.g., page 3 last para) received in the test cell; and a controller (12) communicably coupled to the density sensor ((measuring density using flow meter 6: e.g., page 4 first para)), the permittivity sensor (capacitance cell section 2.2), the temperature sensor (shown on fig.1 and cited in page 4 2nd para).
Sedrez does not implicitly cite and show a Peltier device and heat sink to control the temperature of the fluid test sample received in the test cell; and a controller communicably coupled to the Peltier device.
In the similar field of endeavor, Sieben in e.g., figs.2-4 teaches:
a Peltier device (e.g., figs.3-4: 315) and heat sink (317) to control the temperature (e.g., ¶0159) of the fluid test sample received in the test cell ( 350); and a controller (computer processing system 250) communicably coupled (e.g., fig.2) to the Peltier device 315.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Sieben’s Peltier device and heat sink for Sedrez’s system to control the modified Sedrez’s temperature of the modified Sedrez’s fluid test sample received in the modified Sedrez’s test cell; and a modified Sedrez’s controller communicably coupled to the modified Sedrez’s Peltier device. One of ordinary skill in the art would know using heat sinks and Peltier device in thermal controllers (e.g., ¶0009,0084 of Sieben) would have been motivated to make this modification in order to control the temperature of fluid in the sample test (e.g., ¶0009,0084 of Sieben), and based on MPEP 2143 (C), courts have ruled that Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way is within the purview of a skilled artisan. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421,82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim 4
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, Sedrez further teaches wherein the controller (12) is configured to automatically adjust the temperature of the test cell towards a predetermined value (a desired temperatures 280-340K) in response to a signal from the density sensor (all connected to 10,11), the permittivity sensor (all connected to 10,11), and/or the temperature sensor(all connected to 10,11).
Claim 5
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 4, combined with Sieben teaches wherein the controller is configured to automatically adjust the temperature of the test cell by sending one or more signals to the Peltier device solid state temperature controller (e.g., 250 ¶0159) for the same reason and motivation as cited above.
Claim 11
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, Sedrez further teaches wherein the controller (computer 12 attached to data logging 11) stores instructions (algorithm the computer uses to execute eq. 8 and determine permittivity based on data from sensors) which, when executed, cause the controller to automatically calculate the relative permittivity (e.g., eq.8 on page 10) of a sample in a test cell (1/2), the relationship between permittivity and density (eq.8), or any combination thereof based on a signal from the density sensor, the permittivity sensor and/or the temperature sensor (as cited above and shown on fig.1).
Claim 15
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, and Sedrez teaches the controller 12 but it does not specifically teach a display and controller 12 is configured such that one or more signals may be sent to the display which cause the display to output information relating to the permittivity, relative permittivity, density, temperature, conductivity, viscosity, or any combination thereof of the fluid test sample. However, Examiner notes/holds it is common knowledge in the art to use computer device with a display to display output results from the processor, and therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a display for computer 12 of Sedrez wherein: the apparatus further comprises a display; the controller is communicably coupled to the display; and the controller is configured such that one or more signals may be sent to the display which cause the display to output information relating to the permittivity, relative permittivity, density, temperature, conductivity, viscosity, or any combination thereof of the fluid test sample. Based on MPEP 2143(C), courts have ruled that Simple Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way, is within the purview of a skilled artisan. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421,82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim 16
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, the modified Sedrez further teaches wherein: the apparatus comprises a thermally insulated housing (e.g., page 4 first para: All components and tubing are thermally insulated to facilitate temperature control.); and the Peltier device and/or test cell are at least partially positioned inside the thermally insulated housing (as cited above all components are insulated therefore, housing 3 is also thermally insulated).
Claim 17
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, Sedrez further in fig.2 teaches wherein the permittivity sensor comprises plurality of electrodes (section 2.2 4/5/6/lower guard electrode), the plurality of electrodes comprising a first electrode 5 and a second electrode 6.
Claim 18
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, Sedrez further in fig.2 teaches wherein the plurality of electrodes further comprises a first guard electrode 4 and a second guard electrode ( lower guard electrode cited in section 2.2 ).
Claim 19
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, Sedrez further in fig.2 teaches the permittivity sensor comprised one or more insulating materials (1/2/3/7).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sedrez, ( Sedrez, Paulo C., et al. "Dielectric constant of mixtures of carbon dioxide and n-dodecane between 283 K and 343 K." International Journal of Thermophysics 41 (2020): 1-16) in view of in view of Sieben, US 20170131204 A1 and VANNUFFELEN, WO 2020027766 A1.
Claim 6
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, the combination does not teach wherein the apparatus further comprises a reservoir in fluid communication with the test cell, the reservoir positioned to receive fluid exceeding the volume of the test cell due to thermal expansion of the fluid test sample when resident in the test cell.
In the similar field of endeavor, VANNUFFELEN teaches wherein the apparatus further comprises a reservoir (fig.4 412) in fluid communication with the test cell 414, the reservoir 412 positioned to receive fluid 422 exceeding the volume of the test cell due to thermal expansion of the fluid test sample when resident in the test cell (e.g.,¶0136). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use VANNUFFELEN’s reservoir for the modified Sedrez’s test cell in case of thermal expansion. One of ordinary skill in the art would know the application of reservoirs in fluid systems due to thermal expansion and have been motivated to make this modification in order to depressurizing fluid sample if required (¶0031 of VANNUFFELEN). Furthermore, based on MPEP 2143(F), courts have ruled Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art, is within the purview of a skilled artisan. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421,82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim 7
Sedrez in view of Sieben and VANNUFFELEN teaches the apparatus according to claim 6, wherein VANNUFFELEN further teaches the reservoir comprises an overflow pipe configured to allow excess fluid to flow out of the reservoir (connected to valve 408).
Claim 8-10, 12-14, 25-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sedrez, ( Sedrez, Paulo C., et al. "Dielectric constant of mixtures of carbon dioxide and n-dodecane between 283 K and 343 K." International Journal of Thermophysics 41 (2020): 1-16) in view of in view of Sieben, US 20170131204 A1 and in view of FolgerØ, US 20200319005 A1.
Claim 8
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, Sedrez further teaches wherein the apparatus further comprises:
an inlet (connecting pump to lower inlet of 2), an outlet (connecting Coriolis mass flow meter 6 to upper outlet of 2); a pump (5);
wherein the inlet , the outlet, the pump 5 are configured such that the fluid test sample may be loaded into the test cell (1/2) via the inlet and subsequently drained (as shown on fig.1) from the test cell via the outlet, but the modified Sedrez as cited above does not specifically teaches one or more valves; wherein the inlet, the outlet, the pump and/or the one or more valves are configured such that the fluid test sample may be loaded into the test cell via the inlet and subsequently drained from the test cell via the outlet, FolgerØ teaches an inlet (lower 18), wherein the inlet optionally comprises a filter; an outlet (upper 18); a pump (not shown but pump for driving flow of fluid16 from inlet to outlet); and one or more valves (8/10); wherein the inlet (lower 18), the outlet, the pump and/or the one or more valves (8/10) are configured such that the fluid test sample (multiphase fluid 16) may be loaded into the test cell (4/6) via the inlet (18) and subsequently drained (as shown on fig.1) from the test cell via the outlet (18 up).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use FolgerØ’s valves for the modified Sedrez’s system wherein the inlet, the outlet, the pump and/or the one or more valves are configured such that the fluid test sample may be loaded into the test cell via the inlet and subsequently drained from the test cell via the outlet as taught by FolgerØ. One of ordinary skill in the art would know valves as means to regulate the flow and have been motivated to make this modification in order to a better management and controlling of flow of fluid in system.
Claim 9
Sedrez in view of Sieben and FolgerØ teaches the apparatus according to claim 8, FolgerØ further teaches wherein:
the controller 38 is communicably coupled (e.g., ¶0013) to the pump and/or the one or more valves 8/10; and
the controller 38 is configured to automatically load the fluid test sample into the test cell 4/6 and subsequently drain the fluid test sample from the test cell 4/6 by operating the pump
and/or the one or more valves 8/10 by sending a signal to the pump and/or the one or more valves (e.g., ¶0004 ¶0074), for the same reason and motivation as cited above for claims 1 and 8.
Claim 10
Sedrez in view of Sieben and FolgerØ teaches the apparatus according to claim 9, FolgerØ further teaches wherein the apparatus further comprises one or more level sensors (e.g., ¶0016), and the controller 38 is configured to actuate the one or more valves and/or operate the pump in response to a signal from the one or more level sensors (e.g., ¶0016).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use FolgerØ‘s level sensors for the modified Sedrez’s system. One of ordinary skill in the art would know adding more sensors in different levels help to allow for a finer resolution of a multiphase fluid (e.g., ¶0010 of FolgerØ) and have been motivated to make this modification in order to determine if an unwanted phase is present after settling of the fluid (FolgerØ ¶0016).
Claim 12
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, FolgerØ teaches the apparatus further comprising: one or more additional sensors, permittivity sensors, and/or temperature sensors (sensors14 in addition to sensors 12 plus additional level sensors e.g.,¶0016¶0025). Therefore, the combination of Sedrez in view of Sieben and FolgerØ discloses the claimed invention, as it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have additional sensors for example to determine different phases and more accurate determination for a multiphase fluid, or comparing different sensors results that is a common practice in data validation of experimental works, and it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8 (1977).
Claim 13
Sedrez in view of Sieben and FolgerØ teaches the apparatus according to claim 12, although the combination as cited above does not explicitly teaches wherein: the apparatus comprises one or more additional temperature sensors and the one or more additional temperature sensors are communicably coupled to the controller, and the controller is configured to determine a temperature gradient in the test cell based upon a signal from the temperature sensor and the one or more additional temperature sensors and to automatically adjust the temperature of the test cell towards a predetermined value in response the determination of the temperature gradient; FolgerØ teaches using additional sensors for improving discrimination of different phases of a multiphase fluid, FolgerØ also teaches to automatically adjust the temperature of the test cell towards a predetermined value in response the determination of the temperature (¶0028), and itt would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to comprises one or more additional temperature sensors, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8 (1977).
Claim 14
Sedrez in view of Sieben and FolgerØ teaches the apparatus according to claim 12, Sedrez further teaches wherein the controller (12/11/10) stores instructions (in 12) which, when executed (by the processor of computer 12 on data of 11/10 to calculate equations given in section 3 for determining parameters such as permittivity), cause the controller to extrapolate permittivity, relative permittivity, density, temperature, or any combination thereof (equation 8 derived based on density, temperature,) based upon signals from the density sensor, the permittivity sensor, the temperature sensor and/or any other sensors communicably coupled to the controller (data from logging system 11/ impedance analyzer 10 by the sensors shown by C/T/P and Coriolis mass flow meter 6).
Claim 25
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, FolgerØ further teaches wherein the permittivity sensor is configured to measure the conductivity of a fluid test sample (e.g., ¶0021¶0024), wherein the conductivity is measured simultaneously alongside a simultaneous measurement of density, permittivity and temperature (e.g., ¶0024).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use FolgerØ’s additional sensors and to measure the conductivity of Sedrez’s fluid test sample , wherein the conductivity is measured simultaneously alongside a simultaneous measurement of density, permittivity and temperature as taught by FolgerØ . One of ordinary skill in the art would know additional sensors for example to determine different phases and more accurate determination for a multiphase fluid, or comparing different sensors results that is a common practice in data validation of experimental works and have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the results and to ensure that the parameters provided from the sampling module will have the desired effect in maintaining or increasing the accuracy of the measurements from the multiphase flow meter (e.g., ¶0025 of FolgerØ’).
Claim 26
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, FolgerØ further teaches wherein the apparatus is in-line with, or in proximity to, a fluid vessel and configured for continuous or continual simultaneous measurement of permittivity, density and temperature of at least a portion of fluid in the fluid vessel (fig.1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Sedrez combined with FolgerØ ’s apparatus in-line with, or in proximity to, a fluid vessel and configured for continuous or continual simultaneous measurement of permittivity, density and temperature of at least a portion of fluid in the fluid vessel as taught by FolgerØ . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to apply the same measurements for a fluid vessel. Furthermore, based on MPEP 2143 (C), courts have ruled that Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way is within the purview of a skilled artisan. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421,82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim 27
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 26, FolgerØ further teaches wherein the fluid vessel is a pipeline (18), for the reason as cited above.
Claim 28 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sedrez, ( Sedrez, Paulo C., et al. "Dielectric constant of mixtures of carbon dioxide and n-dodecane between 283 K and 343 K." International Journal of Thermophysics 41 (2020): 1-16) in view of Sieben, US 20170131204 A1, FolgerØ, US 20200319005 A1 and Bruckmann, US 20200011847 A1 .
Claim 28
Sedrez in view of Sieben and FolgerØ teaches apparatus according to claim 8, but the combination does not teach wherein the inlet comprises a filter.
In the similar field of endeavor, Bruckmann teaches wherein the inlet 24 comprises a filter (¶0191).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Bruckmann‘s filter for the modified‘s inlet. One of ordinary skill in the art would know using filters to eliminate unwanted particles in the fluid system have been motivated to make this modification in order to avoid the issues such as reducing accuracy resulting entering unwanted particles to the testing device.
Claims 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sedrez, ( Sedrez, Paulo C., et al. "Dielectric constant of mixtures of carbon dioxide and n-dodecane between 283 K and 343 K." International Journal of Thermophysics 41 (2020): 1-16) in view of Sieben, US 20170131204 A1 and Brengartner, US 20180031460 A1
.
Claim 20
Sedrez in view of Sieben teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, but the combination does not teach wherein the density sensor comprises a flexural resonator.
In the similar field of endeavor, Brengartner in fig.1 teaches a density sensor 1 comprises a flexural resonator (e.g., Abstract ¶0015 ¶0065).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Brengartner’s density sensor comprising a flexural resonator, based on MPEP 2143(D), courts have ruled that Simple applying a known technique to a known product to yield predictable results, is within the purview of a skilled artisan. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421,82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)..
Claim 21
Sedrez in view of Sieben and Brengartner teaches the apparatus according to claim 20, Brengartner further teaches wherein the flexural resonator comprises one or more U-shaped tubes (4) for the same reason as cited above.
Clam 22
Sedrez in view of Sieben and Brengartner teaches apparatus according to claim 20, Brengartner further teaches wherein the flexural resonator comprises a MEMS device (¶0058¶0065) for the same reason and motivation as cited above.
Claim 23
Sedrez in view of Sieben and Brengartner teaches apparatus according to claim 21, Brengartner further teaches wherein the flexural resonator is configured to measure viscosity of the fluid test sample based upon the energy lost during oscillation (e.g., ¶0070) for the same reason and motivation as cited above.
Claim 24
Sedrez in view of Sieben and Brengartner teaches apparatus according to claim 23, Brengartner further teaches wherein the controller is configured to correct a density measurement from the density sensor based upon the measurement of viscosity (¶0070) for the same reason as cited above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fatemeh E. Nia whose telephone number is (469)295-9187. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am to 4:00 pm.
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, Kristina DeHerrera can be reached at (303) 297-4237. 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.
/FATEMEH ESFANDIARI NIA/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
1 Prior art of record