DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-18 are presented for examination. Claims 1, 7, and 10 stand amended. Claims 11-18 are new.
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 received on 24 July 2023 are objected to because:
Fig. 1A fails to comply with PCT Rule 11.13(a) and (c), which states:
(a) Drawings shall be executed in durable, black, sufficiently dense and dark, uniformly thick and well-defined, lines and strokes without colorings.
(c) The scale of the drawings and the distinctness of their graphical execution shall be such that a photographic reproduction with a linear reduction in size to two-thirds would enable all details to be distinguished without difficulty.
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.
Specification
Abstract
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
The abstract includes phrases which can be implied. Examiner suggests amending the abstract to read:
An intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control as well as an experimental method. The device includes an experimental flume to which a water inlet tank and a water return tank are connected; a wave-making system, an illumination system, a dosing system and an aeration system; an environmental condition parameter online monitor capable of determining water environmental parameters online; an online water quality index analyzer for monitoring water quality indexes in real time; a water automatic sampling device for automatically collecting water samples in a single or cycle mode; an offline analyzer capable of determining water quality indexes of the collected water samples or physical-chemical indexes of sediments; and an automatic control module for automatically controlling various devices. Further disclosed is an experimental method based on the intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Disclosure
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Specification paragraph 2 states “The present relates to” which appears to be typographic error for “The present invention relates to.”
The use of acronyms/abbreviations without first defining them, for example, Specification paragraph 18 uses the acronym CODCr. Examiner suggests an acronym definition of “Chemical Oxygen Demand” (CODCr). An acronym/abbreviation must first be defined before using it as the meaning of the acronym/abbreviation may change with time or the context in which it is used.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 7 recite the acronym “CODCr.” The use of acronyms/abbreviations without first defining them. Examiner suggests an acronym definition of “Chemical Oxygen Demand” (CODCr). An acronym/abbreviation must first be defined before using it as the meaning of the acronym/abbreviation may change with time or the context in which it is used.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 1:
a wave-making system, … and is used to produce wind waves … (Specification ¶ 96 “A wave maker (model number: 5000; Eheim Company, Germany; power: 5 W; frequency: 50 HZ) is fixed to the wall of the experimental flume”)
an illumination system, … and is used to simulate illumination; (Specification ¶ 96 “The illumination lamp (LED) (color temperature: 400 k; power: 150 W; Guangzhou Maiguang Electronic Science Technology Co., Ltd.)” )
a dosing system, and is used to add experimental reagents into the experimental flume … (Specification ¶ 97 “The dosing module includes three reagent bottles (volume: 2L) for placing acid, base or reagents, a variable-frequency peristaltic metering pump (model: BW-100; Baoding Chuangrui Precision Pump Co., Ltd., Hebei Province, China), a PLC module, and three liquid adding pipelines….”)
an aeration system, …, and is used to perform aeration treatment … (Specification ¶ 97 “The aeration device includes an air pump and an aeration head (model: 200-3702, Eheim Company, Germany), a laboratory centralized gas supply system ….”)
an environmental condition parameter online monitor, …, … for online determination of water body environmental parameters (Specification ¶ 98 “(4) Environmental condition parameter online monitor: … including monitoring probes (FIG. 4) for determining water environmental parameters (pH/Eh/DO/salinity) online, including: a pH electrode (model: PDlRl; Hach, USA), a fluorescence dissolved oxygen sensor (model: LDOII; Hach, USA), a conductivity electrode (model: 3725E2T; Hach, USA), an Eh electrode (model: HQ30D; Hach, USA), a SC1000 multi-parameter universal controller, a multi-parameter wall-mounted meter, a stainless steel sensor holder, and a scale holder made of aluminum alloy.”)
an online water quality index analyzer, which is used to monitor water quality indexes in real time, (Specification ¶ 99 “The water quality analyzer is purchased from the products of Hach international brand, including three monitoring devices: an ammonia nitrogen monitoring device (Hach, USA, Amtax sc100), a total phosphorus/total nitrogen monitoring device (Hach, USA, NPW160H) and a CODcr automatic monitor (Hach, USA, CODmax plus sc),”)
a water automatic sampling device, …, and is able to automatically collect water samples … (Specification ¶104 “a suction pipe-linear FEP (perfluoroethylene-propylene copolymer), a peristaltic sampling pump, a sampling pipe, a liquid detector, a distribution arm, a pump filter, a controller, and sample bottles ….”)
an offline analyzer, which is used to determine water quality indexes of the collected water samples or physical-chemical indexes of sediments; (Specification ¶105 “a SpectraMaxM2/M2e multifunctional microplate spectrophotometer, an Agilent GC/MS instrument; an Agilen ICP-MS; a Sympatec laser particle size analyzer ….”)
an automatic control module, … devices are directed by the automatic control module to operate according to set parameters and collected data online. (Specification ¶111 “a PLC (Programmable Logic Controller), an industrial personal computer ….”)
Each system, analyzer, device, and module is specifically excluded from being interpreted as software per se. See MPEP §2181(II)(B) fourth to last paragraph.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 – Indefiniteness
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 sixth clause recites “water body environmental parameters, such as pH, Eh, DO, and conductivity.” The phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Dependent claims 2-18 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Claim 8 contains the trademark/trade name “Unisense.” Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a micro-interface analysis instrument and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claim 8 recites “a GC/MS analyzer, and ICP-MS analyzer.” The acronyms GC/MS and ICP-MS are not defined by the claim. For purposes of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets these as: Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) and Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 – Improper Dependency
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 10--18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 10 recites “An experimental method based on the intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control according to claim 1, comprising the following steps: ….” The method merely being “based on” the system of claim 1 fails to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Dependent claims 11-18 are rejected for depending upon a rejected claim.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Examiner Comment on Applicant Admitted Prior Art
Applicant’s disclosure includes significant quantities of Applicant Admitted prior art related to identification of commercially available sensors. The commercial availability of these systems is a public use and/or sale by another. See MPEP §§ 2129 and 2133.03. The Specification identifies specific models available from specific 3rd parties. For discussion:
Specification ¶ 96 “A wave maker (model number: 5000; Eheim Company, Germany; power: 5 W; frequency: 50 HZ) is fixed to the wall of the experimental flume”)
Specification ¶ 96 “The illumination lamp (LED) (color temperature: 400 k; power: 150 W; Guangzhou Maiguang Electronic Science Technology Co., Ltd.)” )
Specification ¶ 97 “The dosing module includes three reagent bottles (volume: 2L) for placing acid, base or reagents, a variable-frequency peristaltic metering pump (model: BW-100; Baoding Chuangrui Precision Pump Co., Ltd., Hebei Province, China), a PLC module, and three liquid adding pipelines….”)
Specification ¶ 97 “The aeration device includes an air pump and an aeration head (model: 200-3702, Eheim Company, Germany), a laboratory centralized gas supply system ….”)
Spec. ¶98 “a pH electrode (model: PDlRl; Hach, USA),”
Spec. ¶98 “a fluorescence dissolved oxygen sensor (model: LDOII; Hach, USA),”
Spec. ¶98 “a conductivity electrode (model: 3725E2T; Hach, USA),”
Spec. ¶98 “an Eh electrode (model: HQ30D; Hach, USA),”
Spec. ¶98 “a SC1000 multi-parameter universal controller,”
Spec. ¶ 99 “The water quality analyzer is purchased from the products of Hach international brand, including three monitoring devices: an ammonia nitrogen monitoring device (Hach, USA, Amtax sc100), a total phosphorus/total nitrogen monitoring device (Hach, USA, NPW160H) and a CODcr automatic monitor (Hach, USA, CODmax plus sc),”)
Spec. ¶104 “an Isco 4700 refrigerator sampler (Teledyne Isco 4700, USA) is adopted for each device”)
Spec. ¶105 “a SpectraMaxM2/M2e multifunctional microplate spectrophotometer, an Agilent GC/MS instrument; an Agilen ICP-MS; a Sympatec laser particle size analyzer ….”
Spec. ¶110 “a wave maker (model: StreamON+5000; Eheim, Germany),”
The identification of model numbers offered by 3rd parties is an admission of prior art under the “on sale” and “public use” of MPEP §2133.03.
Examiner relies upon some of the above Applicant admissions in the prior art rejections below. However, the total set of admissions noted above is relevant for any potential claim amendments Applicant may consider.
In general, it is obvious to combine familiar commercially available products with known methods for their commercially advertised purposes to yield predictable results of the known functions of those commercially available prior art products. MPEP §2141 regarding KSR states:
In KSR, the Supreme Court particularly emphasized "the need for caution in granting a patent based on the combination of elements found in the prior art," Id. at 415, 82 USPQ2d at 1395, and discussed circumstances in which a patent might be determined to be obvious. Importantly, the Supreme Court reaffirmed principles based on its precedent that "[t]he combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results." Id. at 415-16, 82 USPQ2d at 1395.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, and 16
Claims 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0263141 A1 Sahu [herein “Sahu”] in view of CN 205843704 U Zhang, D., et al. [herein “Zhang”], Applicant admissions of public use/’on sale’ (MPEP §§ 2129 and 2133.03), and Yuan, F., et al. “A Biological Sensor System Using Computer Vision for Water Quality Monitoring” IEEE Special Section on Advanced Sensor Tech. on Water Monitoring & Modeling, vol. 6, pp. 61535-61546 (2018) [herein “Yuan”].
Claim 1 recites “1. An intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control.” Sahu title discloses “Intelligent Waterbody Management System.” Sahu paragraph 1 discloses “aeration, nutrient control, monitoring and maintaining water quality parameters at desired levels.”
Sahu paragraph 50 discloses:
"SOD" or Sediment Oxygen Demand as used herein refers to amount of dissolved oxygen required to degraded the waste at the sediment water interface of the waterbody.
Sediment oxygen demand corresponds with bottom sediment.
Claim 1 further recites “comprising: an experimental flume, which is able to be used for simulating nitrogen and phosphorus processes at a sediment/water interface, wherein a water inlet tank and a water return tank are connected to the experimental flume, the water inlet tank is used to preserve experimental water and to add water to the experimental flume.” Sahu does not explicitly disclose an experimental flume; however, in analogous art of water quality test devices, Zhang page 2 fourth paragraph teaches:
test device for simulating lakefront water level and water quality change provided by the utility model comprises a water tank, a lakefront configured slot, a stirring rod, a nitrogen concentration adjusting tank, phosphorus concentration adjusting cell, a bracket, a wave height meter and water quality monitoring instrument, type wave-making machine, a water pump, a tail water collecting tank, a fixing frame, a specific structure
The water tank corresponds with an experimental flume able to be used for simulating respective water processes including nitrogen and phosphorus processes.
Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “the water pump is connected with the water inlet, and the other end of elbow II extends into the tail water collecting tank.” The water inlet corresponds with water inlet to add water to the experimental flume.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu and Zhang. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use the test device for simulating water quality change into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “better simulate the lake with water level and water quality.” See Zhang page 4 fourth paragraph.
Claim 1 further recites “the water return tank is connected to the experimental flume, and is used to achieve the return between water body of the experimental flume and a water body of the water return tank.” Zhang page 2 fourth paragraph teaches:
test device for simulating lakefront water level and water quality change provided by the utility model comprises a water tank, a lakefront configured slot, a stirring rod, a nitrogen concentration adjusting tank, phosphorus concentration adjusting cell, a bracket, a wave height meter and water quality monitoring instrument, type wave-making machine, a water pump, a tail water collecting tank, a fixing frame, a specific structure
Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “water outlet of the elbow I into the gutter.” The water outlet and gutter correspond with the water return tank used to achieve the return.
Claim 1 further recites “a wave-making system, which is installed on an upper part of an inner wall of the experimental flume and is used to produce wind waves on the sediment/water interface.” Zhang page 3 third paragraph teaches “mechanical push type wave-making machine is placed right in the water tank.” Zhang page 3 third paragraph teaches “mechanical push type wave-making machine is placed right in the water tank.”
But neither Sahu nor Zhang explicitly disclose producing ‘wind waves’; however, in Applicant Admitted art, Specification ¶ 96 “A wave maker (model number: 5000; Eheim Company, Germany; power: 5 W; frequency: 50 HZ) is fixed to the wall of the experimental flume)”. This is an Applicant admission that the Eheim model no. 5000 was on sale and/or in public use by another (i.e. Eheim Company). See MPEP §2133.03.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, and Eheim model no. 5000. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use Eheim model no. 500 into the system of waterbody management because the Eheim model no. 5000 has art recognized equivalence for the same wave-making purpose as the push type wave-making machine taught by Zhang. See MPEP §2144.06.
Claim 1 further recites “an illumination system, which is installed directly above the experimental flume and is used to simulate illumination.” Neither Sahu nor Zhang explicitly disclose an illumination system used to simulate illumination; however, in analogous art of water quality monitoring, Yuan page 61536 section II(A) teaches “The experiment platform is illustrated in Fig.1. It is primarily composed of computer, fish tank, camera, and light source.” The light source shown in Yuan figure 1 is an illumination system installed directly above the tank.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, and Yuan. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use a light and camera into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose “to configure suitable lighting conditions in monitoring environment.” See Yuan page 61537 left column section III(A).
Claim 1 further recites “a dosing system, which is installed below the experimental flume and is used to add experimental reagents into the experimental flume to control pH of a water body in the experimental flume, or add pollutants or flocculants.” Sahu paragraph 70 disclose:
the nutrient dispensing module is configured to enable dispensing of drugs or probiotics when the concentration of unionized ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, sulphide, phosphate, vibrio count in the water body is observed to be in a range different from the preset range, and wherein, the sensor module is configured to sense the values of DO, pH, ORP, temperature, turbidity.
Sensing values of pH corresponds with controlling pH of the water body.
Sahu paragraph 71 discloses:
the nutrient dispensing module dispenses drugs or probiotics… the nutrients include without limitation probiotic, prebiotics, microalgae, marine bacteria, lactic acid bacteria, Vibrio species, Bacillus sp., alum, peptides, proteins, antibodies, therapeutics or a combination thereof.”
The nutrient dispensing module corresponds with a dosing system.
Claim 1 further recites “an aeration system, which is installed on the upper part of the inner wall of the experimental flume, and is used to perform aeration treatment on the water body in the experimental flume, so as to control dissolved oxygen of the water body in the experimental flume.” Sahu paragraph 64 disclose “the aeration module is designed to be physically placed in a water body and to aerate hypolimnetic or sediment regions of the waterbody.” Sahu paragraph 65 disclose “the synchronous waves are generated by the aerator for providing dissolved oxygen to sediment water interface.”
Claim 1 further recites “an environmental condition parameter online monitor, which is installed on the inner wall of the experimental flume and is able to extend to different depths of the water body in the experimental flume for online determination of water body environmental parameters, such as pH, Eh, DO, and conductivity.” Sahu paragraph 58 discloses:
the sensing module is an assembly of a plurality of sensors selected from depth sensors, dissolved oxygen (DO) sensors, ORP sensor, GPS sensors, sonar module, temperature sensor, pH sensor, turbidity sensor, proximity sensors, water current velocity measurement sensor, carp velocity sensor, carp acoustics sensors, Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU)sensor.
The sensor module of a plurality of sensors including pH, and dissolved oxygen corresponds with an online parameter monitor. Sahu paragraph 5 discloses “real time monitoring of various water quality parameters.” Real-time corresponds with online.
Claim 1 further recites “an online water quality index analyzer, which is used to monitor water quality indexes in real time, comprising total nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, total phosphorus, and CODCr.” Sahu paragraph 5 discloses “real time monitoring of various water quality parameters.” Sahu paragraph 59 discloses:
to predict water quality parameters including, without limitation, DO, ammonia (NH4-N), unionized ammonia, phosphate (PO4-), turbidity, salinity, temperature, pH, TSS (Total Suspended Solids), TOC (Total Organic Carbon) and ORP (Oxidation Reduction Potential), sulphide, phosphate, nitrite, nitrate, vibrio count, Carbon dioxide (CO2) capture, water column respiration rate, carps respiration rate, sediment respiration rate, Carbon to Nitrogen (C:N ratio), frequency of synchronous and asynchronous waves of aerator or a combination thereof on the data input from the sensor module.
Claim 1 further recites “a water automatic sampling device, which is connected to the experimental flume or the water return tank, and is able to automatically collect water samples in a single or cycle mode.” Sahu does not explicitly disclose an experimental flume; however, in analogous art of water quality test devices, Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph discloses “the water tank equipped with a tail water collecting tank.” The tail water collecting tank corresponds with a water sampling device that is able to collect water samples in either a single or cycle mode.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu and Zhang. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use the test device for simulating water quality change into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “better simulate the lake with water level and water quality.” See Zhang page 4 fourth paragraph.
Claim 1 further recites “an offline analyzer, which is used to determine water quality indexes of the collected water samples or physical-chemical indexes of sediments.” From the above list of alternatives Examiner is selecting “water quality indexes of the collected water samples.”
Sahu paragraph 59 discloses:
the Artificial intelligence module is configured to predict water quality parameters including, without limitation, DO, ammonia (NH4-N), unionized ammonia, phosphate (PO4-), turbidity, salinity, temperature, pH, TSS (Total Suspended Solids), TOC (Total Organic Carbon) and ORP (Oxidation Reduction Potential), sulphide, phosphate, nitrite, nitrate, vibrio count, Carbon dioxide (CO2) capture, water column respiration rate, carps respiration rate, sediment respiration rate, Carbon to Nitrogen (C:N ratio), frequency of synchronous and asynchronous waves of aerator or a combination thereof on the data input from the sensor module.
The artificial intelligence module predicting water quality parameters based on the data input from the sensor module corresponds with an offline analyzer which determines water quality indexes.
Claim 1 further recites “and an automatic control module, wherein the wave-making system, the illumination system, the dosing system, the aeration system, the environmental condition parameter online monitor, the online water quality index analyzer, the water automatic sampling device and the offline analyzer are all connected to the automatic control module, and split devices are directed by the automatic control module to operate according to set parameters and collect data online.” Sahu paragraph 45 discloses “’Control module’ as defined herein is a unit to transmit and receive data from and to other modules.” The control module corresponds with an automatic control module. Transmitting and receiving data from the other modules corresponds with the other modules all being connected to the automatic control module.
The claim language “split devices” is interpreted in light of Specification ¶21 which states “the above split devices” which corresponds to the set of respective other modules listed here.
Claim 4 further recites “4. The intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control according to claim 1, wherein a main device of the wave-making system is a wave maker, which is fixed onto the inner wall of the experimental flume and is able to perform height adjustment in surface water.” Zhang page 3 third paragraph teaches “mechanical push type wave-making machine is placed right in the water tank.” Zhang page 3 third paragraph teaches “mechanical push type wave-making machine is placed right in the water tank.”
But neither Sahu nor Zhang explicitly disclose producing ‘wind waves’; however, in Applicant Admitted art, Specification ¶ 96 “A wave maker (model number: 5000; Eheim Company, Germany; power: 5 W; frequency: 50 HZ) is fixed to the wall of the experimental flume)”. This is an Applicant admission that the Eheim model no. 5000 was on sale and/or in public use by another (i.e. Eheim Company). See MPEP §2133.03.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, and Eheim model no. 5000. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use Eheim model no. 500 into the system of waterbody management because the Eheim model no. 5000 has art recognized equivalence for the same wave-making purpose as the push type wave-making machine taught by Zhang. See MPEP §2144.06.
Claim 4 further recites “and a main device of the illumination system is an illumination lamp, which has a color temperature of 400 k, a power of 150 W and an illumination intensity from 0 Lux to 10,000 Lux; the illumination lamp is able to automatically simulate the change of sunlight within 24 hours a day, and the illumination intensity of the illumination lamp is able to be fixed.” Yuan page 61536 section II(A) teaches “The experiment platform is illustrated in Fig.1. It is primarily composed of computer, fish tank, camera, and light source.” The light source shown in Yuan figure 1 is an illumination system installed directly above the tank.
But neither Sahu, Zhang, nor Yuan explicitly disclose a color temperature of 400 k, a power of 150 W and an illumination intensity from 0 Lux to 10,000 Lux; however, in Applicant Admitted art, Specification ¶ 96 “The illumination lamp (LED) (color temperature: 400 k; power: 150 W; Guangzhou Maiguang Electronic Science Technology Co., Ltd.)” This is an Applicant admission that the Guangzhou Maiguang Electronic Science Technology Co. LED was on sale and/or in public use by another. See MPEP §2133.03.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, and the public/on-sale LEd. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use this illumination system into the system of waterbody management because the LED system has art recognized equivalence for the same illumination purpose as the light source taught by Yuan. See MPEP §2144.06.
Claim 7 further recites “7. The intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control according to claim 1, wherein the online water quality index analyzer comprises an ammonia nitrogen automatic analyzer, a total phosphorus/total nitrogen automatic analyzer.” Sahu paragraph 5 discloses “real time monitoring of various water quality parameters.” Sahu paragraph 59 discloses:
to predict water quality parameters including, without limitation, DO, ammonia (NH4-N), unionized ammonia, phosphate (PO4-), turbidity, salinity, temperature, pH, TSS (Total Suspended Solids), TOC (Total Organic Carbon) and ORP (Oxidation Reduction Potential), sulphide, phosphate, nitrite, nitrate, vibrio count, Carbon dioxide (CO2) capture, water column respiration rate, carps respiration rate, sediment respiration rate, Carbon to Nitrogen (C:N ratio), frequency of synchronous and asynchronous waves of aerator or a combination thereof on the data input from the sensor module.
Ammonia (NH4-N) corresponds with an ammonia nitrogen. Phoshpate, nitrite, and nitrate correspond with a phosphorus and nitrogen analysis respectively.
Claim 7 further recites “and a CODCr automatic analyzer; and the online water quality index analyzer is connected to the experimental flume.” Sahu paragraph 83 disclose “checking whether a preset critical value of [Sediment Oxygen Demand (SOD)], unionized ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, phosphate, sulphide, vibrio count and ORP have been attained.” Sediment oxygen demand corresponds with CODCr.
Sahu paragraph 12 discloses “the sensing module is an assembly of a plurality of sensors selected assembly of a plurality of sensors.”
Claim 10 recites “10. An experimental method based on the intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control according to claims 1, comprising the following steps: collecting sediment and water samples; adding the sediments to an experimental flume; adding the water samples to the experimental flume.” Sahu paragraph 90 disclose “the mopping module is configured to collect waste from the sediment and transfer the waste to the screening tank.” Collecting from the sediment and transferring to the screening tank corresponds with collecting sediment.
Sahu does not explicitly disclose an experimental flume; however, in analogous art of water quality test devices, Zhang page 2 fourth paragraph teaches:
test device for simulating lakefront water level and water quality change provided by the utility model comprises a water tank, a lakefront configured slot, a stirring rod, a nitrogen concentration adjusting tank, phosphorus concentration adjusting cell, a bracket, a wave height meter and water quality monitoring instrument, type wave-making machine, a water pump, a tail water collecting tank, a fixing frame, a specific structure
Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “the water pump is connected with the water inlet, and the other end of elbow II extends into the tail water collecting tank.” The water inlet corresponds with water inlet to add water to the experimental flume.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu and Zhang. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use the test device for simulating water quality change into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “better simulate the lake with water level and water quality.” See Zhang page 4 fourth paragraph.
Claim 10 further recites “turning on an automatic control module.” Sahu paragraph 45 discloses “’Control module’ as defined herein is a unit to transmit and receive data from and to other modules.” The control module corresponds with an automatic control module. Transmitting and receiving data from the other modules corresponds with the other modules all being connected to the automatic control module.
Claim 10 further recites “a wave-making system.” Zhang page 3 third paragraph teaches “mechanical push type wave-making machine is placed right in the water tank.” Zhang page 3 third paragraph teaches “mechanical push type wave-making machine is placed right in the water tank.”
But neither Sahu nor Zhang explicitly disclose producing ‘wind waves’; however, in Applicant Admitted art, Specification ¶ 96 “A wave maker (model number: 5000; Eheim Company, Germany; power: 5 W; frequency: 50 HZ) is fixed to the wall of the experimental flume)”. This is an Applicant admission that the Eheim model no. 5000 was on sale and/or in public use by another (i.e. Eheim Company). See MPEP §2133.03.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, and Eheim model no. 5000. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use Eheim model no. 500 into the system of waterbody management because the Eheim model no. 5000 has art recognized equivalence for the same wave-making purpose as the push type wave-making machine taught by Zhang. See MPEP §2144.06.
Claim 10 further recites “and an illumination system.” Neither Sahu nor Zhang explicitly disclose an illumination system used to simulate illumination; however, in analogous art of water quality monitoring, Yuan page 61536 section II(A) teaches “The experiment platform is illustrated in Fig.1. It is primarily composed of computer, fish tank, camera, and light source.” The light source shown in Yuan figure 1 is an illumination system installed directly above the tank.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, and Yuan. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use a light and camera into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose “to configure suitable lighting conditions in monitoring environment.” See Yuan page 61537 left column section III(A).
Claim 10 further recites “turning on an environmental condition parameter online monitor for online determination of environmental parameters in water body.” Sahu paragraph 58 discloses:
the sensing module is an assembly of a plurality of sensors selected from depth sensors, dissolved oxygen (DO) sensors, ORP sensor, GPS sensors, sonar module, temperature sensor, pH sensor, turbidity sensor, proximity sensors, water current velocity measurement sensor, carp velocity sensor, carp acoustics sensors, Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU)sensor.
The sensor module of a plurality of sensors including pH, and dissolved oxygen corresponds with an online parameter monitor. Sahu paragraph 5 discloses “real time monitoring of various water quality parameters.” Real-time corresponds with online.
Claim 10 further recites “turning on an online water quality index analyzer for real-time monitoring of water quality indexes.” Sahu paragraph 5 discloses “real time monitoring of various water quality parameters.” Sahu paragraph 59 discloses:
to predict water quality parameters including, without limitation, DO, ammonia (NH4-N), unionized ammonia, phosphate (PO4-), turbidity, salinity, temperature, pH, TSS (Total Suspended Solids), TOC (Total Organic Carbon) and ORP (Oxidation Reduction Potential), sulphide, phosphate, nitrite, nitrate, vibrio count, Carbon dioxide (CO2) capture, water column respiration rate, carps respiration rate, sediment respiration rate, Carbon to Nitrogen (C:N ratio), frequency of synchronous and asynchronous waves of aerator or a combination thereof on the data input from the sensor module.
Claim 10 further recites “turning on a water automatic sampling device.” Sahu does not explicitly disclose an experimental flume; however, in analogous art of water quality test devices, Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph discloses “the water tank equipped with a tail water collecting tank.” The tail water collecting tank corresponds with a water sampling device that is able to collect water samples in either a single or cycle mode.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu and Zhang. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use the test device for simulating water quality change into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “better simulate the lake with water level and water quality.” See Zhang page 4 fourth paragraph.
Claim 10 further recites “controlling environmental conditions.” Sahu paragraph 70 disclose:
the nutrient dispensing module is configured to enable dispensing of drugs or probiotics when the concentration of unionized ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, sulphide, phosphate, vibrio count in the water body is observed to be in a range different from the preset range, and wherein, the sensor module is configured to sense the values of DO, pH, ORP, temperature, turbidity.
Dispensing according to respective sensed concentrations corresponds with controlling respective environmental conditions. Sahu paragraph 5 discloses “real time monitoring of various water quality parameters, carp parameters and provide corrective action.” Corrective actions correspond with respective controls.
Claim 10 further recites “starting a simulation experiment; after the simulation experiment is completed, stopping the experiment; draining water and discharging sediments; and preparing for the next simulation experiment.” Sahu paragraph 5 discloses “real time monitoring of various water quality parameters, carp parameters and provide corrective action.” Real time monitoring corresponds with repeated starting, measuring, and stopping respective monitored measurements. Measuring monitored water quality parameters corresponds with starting, stopping, and preparing for respective simulation experiments.
Sahu does not explicitly disclose draining and discharging; however, in analogous art of water quality test devices, Zhang page 2 fourth paragraph teaches:
test device for simulating lakefront water level and water quality change provided by the utility model comprises a water tank, a lakefront configured slot, a stirring rod, a nitrogen concentration adjusting tank, phosphorus concentration adjusting cell, a bracket, a wave height meter and water quality monitoring instrument, type wave-making machine, a water pump, a tail water collecting tank, a fixing frame, a specific structure
The water tank corresponds with an experimental flume able to be used for simulating respective water processes including nitrogen and phosphorus processes.
Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “the water pump is connected with the water inlet, and the other end of elbow II extends into the tail water collecting tank.” The water inlet corresponds with water inlet to add water to the experimental flume and starting the simulation experiment.
Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “water outlet of the elbow I into the gutter.” The water outlet and gutter correspond with the water return tank used to achieve the return discharging water and sediment and stopping the experiment simulation.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu and Zhang. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use the test device for simulating water quality change into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “better simulate the lake with water level and water quality.” See Zhang page 4 fourth paragraph.
Dependent claim 13 is substantially similar to claim 4 above and is rejected for the same reasons.
Dependent claim 16 is substantially similar to claim 7 above and is rejected for the same reasons.
Dependent Claims 2, 3, 6, 11, 12, and 15
Claims 2, 3, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahu, Zhang, Applicant admissions of public use/’on sale’ (MPEP §§ 2129 and 2133.03), and Yuan as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of US patent 6,058,763 Shedd, et al. [herein “Shedd”] and US patent 12,668,507 B2 Shubat, et al. [herein “Shubat”].
Claim 2 further recites “2. The intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control according to claim 1, wherein the experimental flume and the water inlet tank are both installed on a support, and a support cavity is provided below the support.” Zhang page 5 fourth paragraph teach “a bracket 10 on the left side wall of the water tank 5, a bracket 10 is higher than height of tank 1.” The bracket corresponds with a support. The bracket being higher than the height of tank 1 corresponds with the support cavity being below the support. Furthermore, Zhang page 5 first paragraph discloses “fixing frame 24.”
Claim 2 further recites “the support cavity is used to accommodate experimental devices; the experimental devices comprise a peristaltic pump, a valve, a pipeline, the water return tank, a solenoid valve, a sampling cup, and a tee.” Sahu does not explicitly disclose an experimental flume; however, in analogous art of water quality test devices, Zhang page 2 fourth paragraph teaches:
test device for simulating lakefront water level and water quality change provided by the utility model comprises a water tank, a lakefront configured slot, a stirring rod, a nitrogen concentration adjusting tank, phosphorus concentration adjusting cell, a bracket, a wave height meter and water quality monitoring instrument, type wave-making machine, a water pump, a tail water collecting tank, a fixing frame, a specific structure
The water pump corresponds with a peristaltic pump.
Zhang page 5 fourth paragraph teaches “a valve 6.”
Zhang page 5 last paragraph disclose “pipe body.” Pipe body corresponds with a pipeline.
Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “water outlet of the elbow I into the gutter.” The water outlet and gutter correspond with the water return tank.
Sahu and Zhang does not explicitly disclose a solenoid valve; however, in analogous art of automated water quality monitoring, Shedd column 5 lines 18 discloses “solenoid valve 52 and a sampler 54.”
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, and Shedd. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to refrigerate water samples into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of preserving the sample for subsequent analysis. See Shedd column 5 lines 3-9.
Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “the water pump is connected with the water inlet, and the other end of elbow II extends into the tail water collecting tank.” The tail water collecting tank corresponds with a water sampling device.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu and Zhang. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use the test device for simulating water quality change into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “better simulate the lake with water level and water quality.” See Zhang page 4 fourth paragraph.
Claim 2 further recites “and the experimental flume is connected to one water return tank through a return pipe.” Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “water outlet of the elbow I into the gutter.” The water outlet and gutter correspond with the water return tank through a return pipe.
Claim 2 further recites “the experimental flume is further provided with an overflow weir, and the overflow weir is connected to the water return tank through an overflow pipe.” Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “water outlet of the elbow I into the gutter.” The water outlet and gutter correspond with the water return tank through a return pipe.
Sahu does not explicitly disclose an overflow weir; however, in analogous art of water quality control, Shubat column 24 lines 59-60 teaches “Overflow weir 76 directs overflow water out of the system.”
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, Shedd, and Shubat. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use an overflow weir into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of directing “overflow water out of the system.” See Shubat column 24 lines 59-60.
Claim 3 further recites “3. The intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control according to claim 2, wherein four experimental flumes and four water inlet tanks are correspondingly provided; the four experimental flumes are able to operate independently; or, after the four experimental flumes are connected in series, the water body is able to circulate.” From the above list of alternatives Examiner is selecting “the four experimental flumes are able to operate independently.”
Having four as opposed to only one set of experimental flume and water inlet tanks is a mere duplication of parts. The ”mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.” MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B).
Claim 6 further recites “6. The intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control according to claim 2, wherein the environmental condition parameter online monitor comprises monitoring probes; the monitoring probes comprise a pH electrode, a fluorescence dissolved oxygen sensor, a conductivity electrode, and an Eh electrode; and the monitoring probes are fixed onto the inner wall of the experimental flume, and depths of the monitoring probes in the water body are able to be adjusted through a scale holder made of aluminum alloy.” Sahu paragraph 5 discloses “real time monitoring of various water quality parameters.”
Sahu paragraph 58 discloses:
the sensing module is an assembly of a plurality of sensors selected from depth sensors, dissolved oxygen (DO) sensors, ORP sensor, GPS sensors, sonar module, temperature sensor, pH sensor, turbidity sensor, proximity sensors, water current velocity measurement sensor, carp velocity sensor, carp acoustics sensors, Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU)sensor.
The pH sensor corresponds with a pH electrode. The dissolved oxygen (DO) sensors correspond with a dissolved oxygen sensor. The Oxygen Reduction Potential (ORP) sensor corresponds with an Eh electrode.
Each of the respective physical sensors is able to be adjusted by moving their respective physical placement.
Sahu does not explicitly disclose a conductivity electrode; however, in analogous art of water quality control, Shubat column 5 lines 21-28 teach:
the water parameter is one or more of disinfectant demand vs pump output, colorimeter
cell null value, pH, hardness, alkalinity, electrical conductivity (EC), turbidity, ultraviolet (UV) absorption, oxidation reduction potential, colour, secondary disinfectant concentration, cATP, dissolved oxygen, water level, water temperature, temperature differential between two or more locations, flow speed, and pump volume.
A water parameter of electrical conductivity (EC) corresponds with a conductivity electrode.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, Shedd, and Shubat. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use an overflow weir into the system of waterbody management because “Conductivity is a measurement of the concentration of dissolved salts or minerals in solution and can be indicative of water quality.” See Shubat column 23 lines 51-53.
Claim 11 further recites “11. The experimental method according to claim 10, wherein the experimental flume and the water inlet tank are both installed on a support, and a support cavity is provided below the support.” Zhang page 5 fourth paragraph teach “a bracket 10 on the left side wall of the water tank 5, a bracket 10 is higher than height of tank 1.” The bracket corresponds with a support. The bracket being higher than the height of tank 1 corresponds with the support cavity being below the support. Furthermore, Zhang page 5 first paragraph discloses “fixing frame 24.”
Claim 11 further recites “the support cavity is used to accommodate experimental devices; the experimental devices comprise a peristaltic pump, a valve, a pipeline, a water return tank, a solenoid valve, a sampling cup, and a tee.” Sahu does not explicitly disclose an experimental flume; however, in analogous art of water quality test devices, Zhang page 2 fourth paragraph teaches:
test device for simulating lakefront water level and water quality change provided by the utility model comprises a water tank, a lakefront configured slot, a stirring rod, a nitrogen concentration adjusting tank, phosphorus concentration adjusting cell, a bracket, a wave height meter and water quality monitoring instrument, type wave-making machine, a water pump, a tail water collecting tank, a fixing frame, a specific structure
The water pump corresponds with a peristaltic pump.
Zhang page 5 fourth paragraph teaches “a valve 6.”
Zhang page 5 last paragraph disclose “pipe body.” Pipe body corresponds with a pipeline.
Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “water outlet of the elbow I into the gutter.” The water outlet and gutter correspond with the water return tank.
Sahu and Zhang does not explicitly disclose a solenoid valve; however, in analogous art of automated water quality monitoring, Shedd column 5 lines 18 discloses “solenoid valve 52 and a sampler 54.”
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, and Shedd. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to refrigerate water samples into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of preserving the sample for subsequent analysis. See Shedd column 5 lines 3-9.
Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “the water pump is connected with the water inlet, and the other end of elbow II extends into the tail water collecting tank.” The tail water collecting tank corresponds with a water sampling device.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu and Zhang. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use the test device for simulating water quality change into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “better simulate the lake with water level and water quality.” See Zhang page 4 fourth paragraph.
Claim 11 further recites “and the experimental flume is connected to one water return tank through a return pipe.” Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “water outlet of the elbow I into the gutter.” The water outlet and gutter correspond with the water return tank through a return pipe.
Claim 11 further recites “the experimental flume is further provided with an overflow weir, and the overflow weir is connected to the water return tank through an overflow pipe.” Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “water outlet of the elbow I into the gutter.” The water outlet and gutter correspond with the water return tank through a return pipe.
Sahu does not explicitly disclose an overflow weir; however, in analogous art of water quality control, Shubat column 24 lines 59-60 teaches “Overflow weir 76 directs overflow water out of the system.”
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, Shedd, and Shubat. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use an overflow weir into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of directing “overflow water out of the system.” See Shubat column 24 lines 59-60.
Claim 12 further recites “12. The experimental method according to claim 11, wherein four experimental flumes and four water inlet tanks are correspondingly provided; the four experimental flumes are able to operate independently; or, after the four experimental flumes are connected in series, the water body is able to circulate.” From the above list of alternatives Examiner is selecting “the four experimental flumes are able to operate independently.”
Having four as opposed to only one set of experimental flume and water inlet tanks is a mere duplication of parts. The ”mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.” MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B).
Dependent claim 15 is substantially similar to claim 6 above and is rejected for the same reasons.
Dependent Claims 5 and 14
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahu, Zhang, Applicant admissions of public use/’on sale’ (MPEP §§ 2129 and 2133.03), Yuan, Shedd, and Shubat as applied to claims 2 and 11 above, and further in view of US patent 4,724,086 Kortmann [herein “Kortmann”].
Claim 5 further recites “5. The intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control according to claim 2, wherein the dosing system comprises reagent bottles, the number of the reagent bottles is three, the three reagent bottles are respectively used to place acid, alkali, and chemical agent; the reagent bottles each are connected to the water return tank by a dosing pipeline, and a metering pump is connected to the dosing pipeline.” Sahu paragraph 17 disclose “the nutrient dispensing module comprises at least two valves and two tanks, and wherein, at least one of the tanks is detachable.” The tanks of the nutrient dispensing system correspond with reagent bottles.
Sahu paragraph 47 disclose “’Nutrients’ as used herein refers to nutrients like probiotics, prebiotics, minerals, vitamins or any components used for enhancing the quality of water, health and growth conditions.” Probiotics, prebiotics, minerals, vitamins, are at least one chemical agent.
Sahu does not explicitly disclose an acid agent or alkali agent; however, in analogous art of water quality control, Shubat column 25 lines 4-6 teach “One or more pH adjustment supply tank 86 comprises an acid or base for adjusting the pH of the water.” A pH adjustment acid and base tank corresponds to a second and third reagent bottle for dosing of acid or alkali respectively.
Shubat column 11 lines 8-10 teach “a wide variety of water parameters can be measured, including but not limited to disinfectant demand vs pump output.” Measured pump output corresponds with a metering system associated with the respective pump.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, Shedd, and Shubat. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use an overflow weir into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “adjusting a water parameter to mitigate a loss of water integrity in the water system.” See Shubat column 4 lines 35-37 and lines 44-48.
Claim 5 further recites “and the aeration system comprises an aeration head, the aeration head is connected to a gas supply system through a gas path, an air pump is also connected to the gas path, and the gas path is provided with a flowmeter, a control valve.” Sahu paragraph 16 disclose “the aeration module comprises an air pumping module, an aerator, a control module and a battery, and wherein, the aeration module is designed to be physically placed in a water body and to aerate hypolimnetic or sediment regions of the waterbody.” The aerator corresponds with the aeration head. The air pumping module corresponds with an air pump and gas supply.
Sahu paragraph 37 disclose “The module can lead to corrective action, opening or closing of valves or switches.” Opening or closing valves corresponds with a control valve.
Sahu does not explicitly disclose a flowmeter; however, in analogous art of water quality control, Shubat column 11 lines 8-10 teach “a wide variety of water parameters can be measured, including but not limited to disinfectant demand vs pump output.” Measured pump output corresponds with a metering system associated with the respective pump. The measurement device of the pump output is a flow meter.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, Shedd, and Shubat. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use an overflow weir into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “adjusting a water parameter to mitigate a loss of water integrity in the water system.” See Shubat column 4 lines 35-37 and lines 44-48.
Claim 5 further recites “and a pressure relief valve.” Sahu does not explicitly disclose a pressure relief valve of the aeration system; however, in analogous art of conditioning water bodies, Kortmann column 5 lines 24-29 teaches “A pressure relief assembly 86 is positioned at the apex of the dome-shaped upper wall 82 for controlled release of gas build up within the chamber 84 as a result of the gas exchange from the water circulated through the circulator apparatus 80.”
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, Shedd, Shubat, and Kortmann. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use pressure relief valves into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “for controlled release of gas build up within the chamber 84 as a result of the gas exchange from the water circulated through the circulator apparatus.” See Kortmann column 5 lines 24-29.
Dependent claim 14 is substantially similar to claim 5 above and is rejected for the same reasons.
Dependent Claims 8 and 17
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahu, Zhang, Applicant admissions of public use/’on sale’ (MPEP §§ 2129 and 2133.03), and Yuan as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of US patent 6,058,763 Shedd, et al. [herein “Shedd”] and US patent 7,470,898 B2 Merrick, et al. [herein “Merrick”], US patent 10,214,432 B2 Chowdhury, et al. [herein “Chowdhury”], Applicant admissions of public use/’on sale’ (MPEP §§ 2129 and 2133.03), and Li, C., et al. “Planar optode: A two-dimensional imaging technique for studying spatial-temporal dynamics of solutes in sediment and soil” Earth-Science Reviews, vol. 197, no. 102916 (2019) [herein “Li”].
Claim 8 further recites “8. The intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control according to claim 1, wherein the number of the water automatic sampling devices is two.” Having two as opposed to only one automatic sampling devices is a mere duplication of parts. The ”mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.” MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B).
Claim 8 further recites “a refrigerator type sampler is used as the water automatic sampling device.” Sahu and Zhang does not explicitly disclose a refrigerator sampler; however, in analogous art of automated water quality monitoring, Shedd column 5 lines 3-9 teaches:
A sampler 54 is provided for automated water sampling and further off-line analysis of the water quality. A control signal from controller 30 to sampler 54 via termination panel 48 will result in a sample being taken from water stream 18. This sample is stored and refrigerated in sampler 54 for preservation and subsequent analysis with standard analytical chemistry equipment or other means.
Refrigerating the sample in the sampler corresponds with a refrigerator-type sampler for automatic sampling.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, and Shedd. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to refrigerate water samples into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of preserving the sample for subsequent analysis. See Shedd column 5 lines 3-9.
Claim 8 further recites “and the water automatic sampling device is connected to the water body in the water return tank or the experimental flume.” Sahu does not explicitly disclose an experimental flume; however, in analogous art of water quality test devices, Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph discloses “the water tank equipped with a tail water collecting tank.” The tail water collecting tank corresponds with a water sampling device that is able to collect water samples in either a single or cycle mode.
Zhang page 3 fourth paragraph teaches “the water pump is connected with the water inlet, and the other end of elbow II extends into the tail water collecting tank.” The water inlet corresponds with water inlet to add water to the experimental flume.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu and Zhang. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use the test device for simulating water quality change into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “better simulate the lake with water level and water quality.” See Zhang page 4 fourth paragraph.
Claim 8 further recites “and the offline analyzer comprises a multifunctional microplate spectrophotometer.” Sahu paragraph 62 discloses “optional spectrophotometer.” The spectrophotometer corresponds with a multifunctional spectrophotometer.
Claim 8 further recites “a GC/MS analyzer, an ICP-MS analyzer.” Sahu does not explicitly disclose a GC/MS analyzer, an ICP-MS analyzer; however, in analogous art of water quality monitoring, Merrick column 1 lines 60-63 teaches “Currently, quantitative analysis of chemical and biological pollutants is performed with analytical methods such as gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (GC-MS).” Merrick column 2 line 42 in Table 1D teaches “Inductively Coupled Plasma w/Mass Spectrometry.”
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, Shedd, and Merrick. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use analytical mass spectrometry into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of using standard methods for examination of water and wastewater. See Merrick column 1 lines 60-67.
Claim 8 further recites “a laser particle size analyzer.” Sahu does not explicitly disclose a laser particle size analyzer; however, in analogous art of online water quality monitoring, Chowdhury abstract teaches “monitoring quality of a water flow in a pipe, by diverting a flow into a laser particle counter to count particles within a particle size interval in the water.”
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, Shedd, Merrick, and Chowdhury. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use a laser particle counter into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “monitoring, sampling and classifying of the contaminants (pharmaceutical residues as well as parasites Cryptosporidium and Giardia) in real time.” See Chowdhury column 4 lines 42-44.
Claim 8 further recites “a Unisense microelectrode.” Unisense is a trademark. See §112 discussion above.
Neither Sahu nor Zhang explicitly disclose a Unisense microelectrode; however, in Applicant Admitted art, Specification ¶ 105 “a Danish Unisense microelectrode”. This is an Applicant admission that the Unisense microelectrodes were on sale and/or in public use by another (i.e. Unisense Holdings, trademark owner). See MPEP §2133.03.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, Shedd, Merrick, Chowdhury, and a Unisense microelectrode. “The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results." See MPEP §2141 regarding KSR at 415-16, 82 USPQ2d at 1395.
Claim 8 further recites “and a planar optode system.” Sahu does not explicitly disclose a planar optode system; however, in analogous art of sediment quality evaluation, Li title teaches “Planar optode: A two-dimensional imaging technique for studying spatial-temporal dynamics of solutes in sediment.”
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, Shedd, Merrick, Chowdhury, and Li. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use a planar optode into the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “real-time monitoring and evaluation of the dynamics of various analytes in sediments.” See Li page 16 left column first paragraph.
Dependent claim 17 is substantially similar to claim 8 above and is rejected for the same reasons.
Dependent Claims 9 and 18
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahu, Zhang, Applicant admissions of public use/’on sale’ (MPEP §§ 2129 and 2133.03), and Yuan as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of US 2016/0210338 A1 Van Pelt, et al. [herein “Van Pelt”].
Claim 9 further recites “9. The intelligent simulation device for bottom sediment pollution process and control according to claim 1, wherein a PLC is used as the automatic control module, the PLC is a programmable logic controller control system.” Sahu paragraph 90 discloses “the control module comprises of a microcontroller and a wifi component.” The microcontroller corresponds with a PLC of a computer system.
Claim 9 further recites “and the automatic control module is installed in a control cabinet.” Sahu paragraph 62 discloses “the invention housing sensor data acquisition system in the sensor block.” The housing of the system corresponds with a control cabinet.
Claim 9 further recites “and a touch screen page of an industrial personal computer of the automatic control module is capable of displaying a structure and operation status of the intelligent simulation device, and the online monitoring number, change curves of environmental parameters and water quality indexes along with time in real time.” Examiner interprets the claim language “is capable of” as beginning a functional description of the touch screen page. See MPEP §2173.05(g).
Sahu paragraph 90 discloses “the control module comprises of a microcontroller and a wifi component.” The microcontroller corresponds with a PLC of a computer system.
Sahu paragraph 62 discloses “the sensor module further comprises a cooling fan, a display.”
But Sahu does not explicitly disclose a touch screen; however, in analogous art of water monitoring systems, Van Pelt paragraph 55 teaches “Display system 1170 may also receive input as a touchscreen.”
Van Pelt paragraph 35 teaches “the set of time series data may be displayed through a content page at step 430.” Van Pelt paragraph 37 teach “a sensor may be identified as failing to perform for a particular period of time.” Identification of failing sensors corresponds with being capable of displaying a structure and operation status of the simulation device.
Van Pelt paragraph 38 teaches:
Metrics for data may be provided dynamically for time series data at step 460. Metrics may be provided automatically for data currently being viewed by user or otherwise selected by a user. For example, the user interface may receive input from a user of a period of data. Upon receiving the selection, the selected period may be provided to server 140, and server 140 may determine the particular metrics. Server 140 may then update a content page through client machine 160. The updated content page may show the metrics associated with the particular time period.
Displaying time series data metrics corresponds with being capable of displaying monitor data number (i.e. time periods) with respective change curves of parameters and water indices in real time.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahu, Zhang, Yuan, and Van Pelt. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use display systems with the system of waterbody management for the advantageous purpose of “provides collaborative water analytics” which can “be provided graphically and may be analyzed, annotated, and otherwise processed.” See Van Pelt ¶¶19-20.
Dependent claim 18 is substantially similar to claim 9 above and is rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20120185170 A1 Miskewitz; Robert J. et al.
teaches
In Situ Measurement of Sediment Oxygen Demand
US 11821885 B2 Dong; Zhichao et al.
Test methods for simulating sediment pollutant release under effect of river channel erosion;
A test water tank with flow conditions.
US 10753900 B2 Li; Baikun et al.
Real-time in situ sensing of water-related parameters using micro-electrode array (MEA) for “real-time in situ global sensing assemblies.”
Moscetta, P., et al. “Instrumentation for continuous monitoring in marine environments” OCEANS, pp. 1-10 (2009)
Continuous monitoring data are a useful source of information for the understanding of seasonal chemical and biological changes in marine environments.
Gholizadeh, M.H., et al. “A Comprehensive Review on Water Quality Parameters Estimation Using Remote Sensing Techniques” Sensors, vol. 16, no. 1298 (2016)
Satellite and airplane remote sensing to estimate water quality.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jay B Hann whose telephone number is (571)272-3330. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-7pm EDT.
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, Renee Chavez can be reached at (571) 270-1104. 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.
/Jay Hann/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2186 11 September 2026
Prosecution Insights