Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/231,504

SWIMMING POOLS AND SPAS WITH WATER USAGE CONTROL

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 08, 2023
Priority
Aug 08, 2022 — provisional 63/396,054
Examiner
TRAN, VINCENT HUY
Art Unit
2115
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
ZODIAC POOL SYSTEMS LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allowance Rate
944 granted / 1089 resolved
+31.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1124
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.0%
-32.0% vs TC avg
§103
42.6%
+2.6% vs TC avg
§102
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
§112
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1089 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claims 7-9, 11 are pending in the application. Examiner’s Note: The examiner has cited particular passages including column and line numbers, paragraphs as designated numerically and/or figures as designated numerically in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claims, other passages, paragraphs and figures of any and all cited prior art references may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing an eventual response, to fully consider the context of the passages, paragraphs and figures as taught by the prior art and/or cited by the examiner while including in such consideration the cited prior art references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention. MPEP 2141.02 VI: “PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS." Response to Amendment and Arguments Applicant amended independent claim 7 to further specify: A control pool system for a swimming pool or spa comprising: at least one environmental sensor configured to sense environmental information about an environment of the swimming pool or spa; at least one water level sensor configured to observe a water level of water of the swimming pool or spa; and a control system communicatively coupled with the at least one environmental sensor and the at least one water level sensor, wherein the control system is configured to: receive environmental data from the at least one environmental sensor; receive water level data from the at least one water level sensor; determine a change in water level based on the water level data; and responsive determining the change in water level, determine a reason for the change in water level based on the environmental data; and generate a control response to offset the change in water level based on the determined change in water level. Applicant’s argument with respect to amended claim has fully considered but moot in view of new ground of rejection. Deverse US 2020/0300548 is introduced in response to amended claim. The teachings of Bright as disclosed in previous office action are hereby incorporated by references to the extend applicable to the amended claim. Regarding applicant’s argument that Bright fails to teach or suggest at least "responsive determining the change in water level, determine a reason for the change in water level based on the environmental data". Applicant argues while Bright "determines an expected rate of water loss for the reservoir 110 based on at least one predetermined factor" which "can be an environmental factor," (Bright at [0043]), it does not determine a reason for a change in water level based on a detected change in water level. Instead, Bright performs the opposite determination because the environmental factor is "predetermined." In other words, Bright (i) receives a predetermined environmental factor and (ii) determines an expected rate of water loss for the predetermined environmental factor. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Bright teaches determining an expected rate of water loss based on environmental data (e.g., temperature, humidity, wind) and comparing the expected rate with measured rate of water loss (See fig. 6). This comparison inherently determines whether the observed change in water level is attributable to environment conditions or to another cause, such as a leak. Therefore, Bright teaches “"responsive determining the change in water level, determine a reason for the change in water level based on the environmental data". Applicant’s contention that Bright relies on “predetermined” environmental factors and therefore does not perform the claimed determination is not persuasive. The term “predetermined” refers to the type of factor considered (e.g., environmental variables), not to the exclusion of receiving or using environmental data. Bright still relies on environmental data inputs to compute expected water loss and to evaluate the cause of observed water loss. Further, the claimed sequence of determining a change in water level and then determining a reason for that change does not distinguish over Bright, as Bright necessarily measures water loss and performs the comparison after such measurement, thereby attributing cause based on environmental data. Such attribution constitutes determining a reason for the change in water level. According, the argument is not persuasive. 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. 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. Claim(s) 7-8, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deverse US Pub. No. 2010/03005481 in view of Bright. Regarding claim 7, Deverse teaches a pool system for a swimming pool or spa comprising [An automated system for monitoring and maintaining fluid level in a swimming pool, spa, or other environment containing water is provided – Abstract and fig. 1]: at least one water level sensor [sensor 104] configured to observe a water level of water of the swimming pool or spa; and a control system [remote control 110] communicatively coupled with the at least one environmental sensor and the at least one water level sensor, wherein the control system is configured to: receive water level data [“low water” signal] from the at least one water level sensor; determine a change in water level based on the water level data; and generate a control response to offset the change in water level based on the determined change in water level. [0034] In one implementation, the sensor assembly 104 is mounted to a surface that provides a fixed reference level relative to the pool, such as the underside of the skimmer deck lid 118 as shown in FIG. 1. As described in greater detail below, the sensor assembly 104 incorporates a novel mounting system that facilitates precise positioning of the sensor assembly at a preselected operational level relative to the water so that accurate water level measurements can be made. Generally, the sensor assembly 104 is adapted to measure the water level in the pool 102 and send a "low water" signal to the remote controller 110 when the water level falls below a predetermined threshold level, which in turn triggers the remote controller 110 to turn on the remote water valve 106, such as a solenoid valve, to add fill water to the pool. When the water level has reached the predetermined threshold level, there are various ways to trigger the remote controller 110 to turn off the remote water valve 106. For example, the sensor assembly 104 can transmit a "close valve" signal to the remote controller, or the sensor assembly can simply stop transmitting the "low water" signal, both of which can serve as triggers for the remote controller to shut off the remote water valve. As described in greater detail below, the sensor assembly is designed to rapidly and accurately detect water level changes in swimming pools even where the water can be turbulent due to the effects of weather and other disturbances. [0042] In one embodiment, the automated system 100 has two modes of operation. Mode 1 provides a continuous auto-fill function in which the sensor assembly measures water level and updates the remote controller periodically, such as every 10 minutes, 24 hours a day. The remote controller turns the remote water valve on when the remote controller detects a "low water" signal from the sensor assembly, and turns the remote water valve off if the remote controller does not detect a "low water" signal from the sensor assembly. In one embodiment, the remote controller queries the sensor pod periodically, such as every 10 minutes, for a "low water" signal. Deverse does not teach at least one environmental sensor configured to sense environmental information about an environment of the swimming pool or spa; receive environmental data from the at least one environmental sensor; and responsive determining the change in water level, determine a reason for the change in water level based on the environmental data. Bright teaches another pool system for a swimming pool comprising at least one water level sensor [water level sensor – par. 0042] configured to observe a water level of water of the swimming pool or spa. Specifically, Bright teaches at least one environmental sensor [Temperature or humidity sensor] configured to sense environmental information about an environment of the swimming pool or spa; receive environmental data from the at least one environmental sensor; and responsive determining the change in water level (water loss), determine a reason for the change in water level based on the environmental data. [0042] In one embodiment, the rate of water loss for the reservoir 110 is proportional to the amount of water added to the reservoir 110. In another embodiment, the early leak-detection device 102 includes the water flow measurement device 106, or another water flow sensing device, such that it may detect how much water is added to the reservoir 110, internally, as opposed to receiving water flow measurements from an external component. In an alternative embodiment, the early leak-detection device 102 receives information associated with how much fresh water is added to the reservoir 110 from a water level sensor disposed within the reservoir 110. In other embodiments, the early leak-detection device 102 can receive such information from a water-level maintenance system. [0043] In step 604, the early leak-detection device 102 determines an expected rate of water loss for the reservoir 110 based on at least one predetermined factor. The at least one predetermined factor can be an environmental factor. As used herein, the term “environmental factor” is intended to indicate any factor relating to or arising from the surrounds of the reservoir 110. In one embodiment, the early leak-detection device 102 calculates the expected rate of water loss based on at least one predetermined factor that is received from one or more external sensors and statistical information sources. In one embodiment, the sensor can be a temperature sensor operably configured to measure a temperature of water within the reservoir 110, near a top surface of the reservoir 110. The temperature sensor can be communicatively coupled to the processor of the early leak-detection device 102 and be operably configured to communicate information associated with the measured temperature to the processor to calculate the rate of expected water loss for the reservoir 110. In another embodiment, the sensor can be a temperature sensor operably configured to detect a temperature of air substantially proximate the top surface of water within the reservoir 110. Temperature associated with the water in the reservoir 110 and air proximate the top surface of water in the reservoir 110 will affect evaporation rates of water within the reservoir 110. Accordingly, predetermined factors used to determine and calculate the expected rate of water loss is an evaporate rate and a temperature associated with the reservoir 110. [0049] The early leak-detection device 102 can be operably configured to receive local weather-related statistical information from national or local databases accessible a wide-area network, a local-area network, or the like, via the Internet. [0051] In step 606, the early leak-detection device 102 compares the determined rate of water loss to the expected rate of water loss. The comparison can be a determination of the difference or ratio between the determined rate of water loss with the expected rate of water loss. In step 608, the early leak-detection device 102 can query whether the determined rate of water loss exceeds the expected rate of water loss by a predetermined threshold. The predetermined threshold is stored in non-volatile memory of the early leak-detection device 102 for access to the threshold value whenever a comparison is desired to be performed. [0052] In step 610, in response to the rate of determined water loss exceeding the expected rate of water loss by the predetermined threshold, the early leak-detection device 102 can determine that there may be a leak associated with the reservoir 110. The early leak-detection device 102 may assign a percentage value associated with how much the detected water loss rate exceeds the expected water loss rate. In summary, Bright teaches a system configured to determine the actual level of water loss based on water level sensor data, calculate an expected level of water loss using environmental sensor information (evaporation, temperature, humidity, wind, and sunlight exposure), and determine whether the level of water loss exceeds the expected loss by a predetermined threshold. If the actual level of water loss exceeds the expected loss by a predetermined threshold, the system can conclude that there is a potential leak or else the level water loss is considered normal based on the current environmental information. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the swimming pool system of Deverse with the at least one environmental sensor configured to sense environmental information about an environment of the swimming pool or spa; receive environmental data from the at least one environmental sensor; and responsive determining the change in water level, determine a reason for the change in water level based on the environmental data of Bright. As suggested by Bright, the motivation for doing so would has been to prevents costly water loss and structural damage associated with water leaks [par. 0073]. Regarding claim 8, Bright teaches the environmental data comprises at least one of wind data, humidity data, or air temperature data [See par. 0045, 0048]. Regarding claim 11, Bright teaches the environmental data comprises at least two types of environmental data, and wherein the control system is configured to determine a plurality of causes for the water loss based on the at least two types of environmental data [par. 0043-0048, 0070: temperature, humidity, wind, evaporation rate, sensitive material (causes of the level of water loss)]. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deverse/Bright as applied to claim 7 above, further in view of Marsousi. Regarding claim 9, Bright does not teach the control system is further configured to receive visual data of at least a portion of the swimming pool or spa from at least one camera as the at least one water level sensor. Marsousi teaches another control system configured to determine the water loss of a swimming pool. Specifically, Marsousi teaches teach the control system is further configured to receive visual data of at least a portion of the swimming pool or spa from at least one camera [Camera 190] as the at least one water level sensor [See fig. 5-6, par. 0047, 0082, 0085]. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the sensor of Deverse/Bright with receive visual data of at least a portion of the swimming pool or spa from at least one camera as the at least one water level sensor of Marsousi. The motivation for doing would has been to simplify the circuitry of Deverse/Bright system while enabling the system to take advantages of the multiple function of a camera (i.e., swimmer count, safety monitor...). Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINCENT HUY TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7210. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-4:00. 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, Kamini S Shah can be reached at 571-272-2279. 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. VINCENT H TRAN Primary Examiner Art Unit 2115 /VINCENT H TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115 1 Cited by Examiner on 10/24/2025.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 08, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 17, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 21, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602304
SELF-LEARNING GREEN APPLICATION WORKLOADS
2y 11m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596349
COMPUTER-AUTOMATED SCRIPTED ELECTRONIC ACTOR CONTROL
3y 4m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596387
FLUID CONTROL DEVICE, FLUID CONTROL METHOD, AND FLUID CONTROL PROGRAM
3y 3m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589279
SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND MACHINE LEARNING FOR GENERATING AN ALIGNMENT PLAN CAPABLE OF ENABLING THE ALIGNING OF A USER'S BODY DURING A TREATMENT SESSION
3y 9m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585257
AUTOMATED DATA TRANSFER BETWEEN AUTOMATION SYSTEMS AND THE CLOUD
3y 1m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+9.3%)
2y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1089 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month