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 .
35 USC 102/103
Claim(s) 11,12,13,14,15,16,17,19,20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Bates 6,167,107.
Bates teaches (Figure 4) system for controlling a flow rate of a flow of a fluid through an instrument 120/122, the system comprising: the instrument having an inlet, an exit, and a throat 160 located between the inlet and the exit; a first pressure transducer 122 operative to measure a pressure upstream of the inlet of the instrument; a second pressure transducer 124 operative to measure an ambient pressure either proximate to or within the instrument; a differential pressure transducer 120 operative to sense a pressure differential between the throat and a point upstream of the inlet of the instrument; a controller 126 in electrical communication with the differential pressure transducer and the first pressure transducer, the controller operative to perform actions comprising: creating the flow within a conduit 146 fluidly connected to the instrument at a first velocity, creating the flow within the conduit includes creating the flow through one of a plurality of ports of manifold 104; converting a signal from the first pressure transducer into the pressure upstream of the inlet; converting a signal from the second pressure transducer into the ambient pressure; converting a signal from the differential pressure transducer into the pressure differential; determining the flow rate through the instrument based on the pressure differential, the pressure upstream of the inlet and the ambient pressure (lines 56-65, col. 6); and increasing or decreasing the flow rate
As to claims 11,12,13,19,20, one of ordinary skill would either recognize that that the blower speed is inherently controlled within a range of the preselected flow; or in the alternative, it would have been obvious change the flow of the blower when the measured flow outside of a desired range.
As to claims 14,16, see lines 48-56.
As to claim 15, CFM is volumetric.
As to claim 18, when the arm rotates, there are breaks in sampling from each inlet 102. As such, the system determines to that extent.
Claim(s) 17,18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Bates 6,167,107.
As to claim 17, it would have been obvious to provide such information as the Reference teaches that such is useful in single elevations with a 3% (weather) tolerance, making for a less complex system.
The arm 104A rotates to a different input 102 causing a different mode.
As to claim 18, on of ordinary skill would know to automate the device to allow for a non-manual system, such allowing for a controller to automate the arm, and thus inherently distinguish between a non-sampling (arm not moving) and sampling mode. In the alternative, it is known to employ a indicating light that a device is operating, so that one of ordinary skill will not foolishly ineterfere.
COMMENT AS TO CLAIM 1
As to claim 1, Bates 6,167,107 teaches (Figure 2) a method for controlling a flow and measuring a flow rate of the flow 101A through an instrument 106 connected to a manifold 104, the method comprising: creating the flow within a conduit 108 fluidly connected to the instrument at a first velocity, creating the flow within the conduit 108 includes creating the flow through one of a plurality of ports (specifically, port 102 which is fluidly connected to pivot arm 104A, which arm carries 1 CFM (lines 63-64, col. 4) of the 4 CFM which travels through inlet 102 immediately below the fluid inlet to the arm 104) of the manifold; measuring an inlet pressure at an inlet of the instrument (via either sensor 120 or 122); measuring an ambient pressure either proximate to or within the instrument (via either sensor 124 or 122); determining the flow rate through the instrument based on a pressure differential between the inlet pressure and the is created by the blower 126, and that same 1 CMF is created in the flow through the one port which carries the sum of 3 CFM and 1 CMF immediately below the arm 104a). As such, the prior art neither teaches nor suggests the combination of “ambient” (line 2 from last, claim 1), in combination with remaining claim limitations. The subcombination of remaining claim limitations is taught by Bates, but not the combination.
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT R RAEVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2204. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon to Friday from 8am to 4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina DeHerrera, can be reached at telephone number 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/ROBERT R RAEVIS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855