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 .
Amendment Entered
In response to the amendment filed on December 22nd, 2025, amended claims 1-18, and new claims 19-20 are entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks and amendments with respect to the abstract objection have been fully considered. The objection is withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Applicant's remarks and amendments with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered. The objections are withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Applicant's remarks and amendments with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered. Although a majority of the rejections have been withdrawn in view of the amendment, the 112(b) rejection of claim 4 has been maintained, and further clarified below.
Claim Objection
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informality:
Claim 13 recites "the receptacle’s open ended inner volume" in line 4, but should read “the receptacle’s inner volume”
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:
“sealing elements” in Claim 9
“communication module” in Claim 18
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
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.
Claim 4 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites “such that at least a portion of the surface area of two adjacent capacitive surface sensor electrodes overlaps on the same distance from the bottom of the receptacle” in lines 2-4. It is still unclear as to how a portion of the surface area can “overlap on the same distance” from any area. Furthermore, it is unclear as to whether “the surface area of two adjacent capacitive surface sensor electrodes” is referring to the previously introduced “wherein the at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes have the same surface area as each other” from Claim 1, or a separate element, such as the combined surface areas of two separate, adjacent capacitive surface sensor electrodes. Additionally, the limitation of “the same distance” is unclear, as it could be referring to one of the “different distances from the bottom surface” previously introduced in Claim 1, or a separate element.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 7-8, 10-11, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holt et al (U.S. Publication No. 2017/105670; cited by Applicant; previously cited) in view of Kostov (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0100068).
Regarding Claim 1, Holt discloses a device (capacitive measurement device with integrated electrical and mechanical shielding; Abstract) for tracking a subject's daily urine output (urine measurement device 100; Figures 1A-1D) comprising:
a receptacle (container portion 102) having a bottom surface and sidewalls defining an inner volume (Figures 1-2), said inner volume having an open end at a top of the receptacle, and said inner volume to be filled with a fluid (the container portion 102 includes a curved side-wall 106 having an interior surface 108 and an exterior surface 110, but does not include any top or bottom walls…where the top surface of the electronics portion 104 serves as a bottom wall for the container portion 102; [0040]; Figures 1-2);
a capacitive sensor circuit configured for measuring a height of the fluid filled into the receptacle within a capacitive sensing area (the capacitive sensor 112 operates on the principle of differential capacitance to measure the height of the urine, other fluid, and/or other substance within the sensing portion 124; [0052]);
said capacitive sensor circuit comprising a sensor plane (first capacitive plate 116; [0044]), at least one capacitive surface sensor electrode (a first capacitive plate 116 (acting as a sensor electrode facing the measurement volume inside of the container portion 102); [0044]), and a ground plane (a second capacitive plate 118 (acting as a reference electrode to get a reference measurement outside the container portion 102); [0044]);
an electrical shielding (substrate 114; interior shield 120; exterior shield 130; [0044], [0049], [0053]) sandwiched between the sensor plane and the ground plane (the substrate 114 is sandwiched between the first capacitive plate 116 and the second capacitive plate 118; [0044]); wherein the electrical shielding fully encloses the sensor plane and the at least one capacitive surface sensor electrode (the substrate 114 is sandwiched between the first capacitive plate 116 and the second capacitive plate 118; [0044]; the at least one interior shield 122 protects the capacitive sensor 112; [0049-0051]; at least one exterior shield 130 positioned outside the container portion 102 and shielding the capacitive sensor 112 from effects in an external environment 132, such as a hand coming near or touching the capacitive sensor 112 and distorting the electrical field (such as by increasing the capacitance) or another type of potential interference from the external environment 132…In exemplary embodiments, the at least one exterior shield 130 completely covers the capacitive sensor 112 from the environment outside of the container portion 102. In exemplary embodiments the at least one interior shield 122 and the at least one exterior shield 130 are a single piece of material that covers over the top of the edge of the side-wall 106 and the sensing portion 124 of the container portion 102; [0053]) except for the capacitive sensing area of the capacitive surface sensor electrode that face the inner volume of the receptacle (Examiner’s Note: The substrate 114 and shields fully enclose the sensor plane and the at least one capacitive surface sensor electrode except for the area that is facing the inner volume of the receptacle), such that the electrical shielding shields the capacitive sensing area from interference and minimizes parasitic capacitance between the sensor plane and the ground plane configured to enclose the capacitive sensor electrodes (the container portion 102 includes at least one exterior shield 130 positioned outside the container portion 102 and shielding the capacitive sensor 112 from effects in an external environment 132, such as a hand coming near or touching the capacitive sensor 112 and distorting the electrical field (such as by increasing the capacitance) or another type of potential interference from the external environment 132…the additional capacitive sensors 112 can also be shielded internally by interior shields and externally by exterior shields; [0053-0054]; Examiner’s Note: The Examiner notes wherein the limitation “shields the capacitive sensing area from interference and minimizes parasitic capacitance between the sensor plane and the ground plane configured to enclose the capacitive sensor electrodes” is a recitation of the intended use of the invention. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations); and,
an electronic module comprising a processing unit connected to the capacitive sensor circuit (electronics portion 104; [0066]) which is configured to:
receive fluid height data from the capacitive sensor circuit (the capacitive sensor 112 operates on the principle of differential capacitance to measure the height of the urine, other fluid, and/or other substance within the sensing portion 124; [0052]; Container portion 602 and its component parts operate similarly to the description of container portion 102 above, just that there are signals from each of the capacitive sensors 612A, 612B, and 612C that are sent to the electronics portion 104 for processing and determination of at least one of the flow rate of the substance into the container portion 602, the height of the substance within the container portion 602, and the volume of the substance within the container portion 602; [0066]); and
determine, from said fluid height data, a corresponding urine volume (Container portion 602 and its component parts operate similarly to the description of container portion 102 above, just that there are signals from each of the capacitive sensors 612A, 612B, and 612C that are sent to the electronics portion 104 for processing and determination of at least one of the flow rate of the substance into the container portion 602, the height of the substance within the container portion 602, and the volume of the substance within the container portion 602; [0066]; [0041]; [0058]).
Although Holt teaches multiple capacitive sensors (capacitive sensors 612A, 612B, and 612C; [0066]), Holt fails to teach at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes coupled to the sensor plane; wherein the at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes have the same surface area as each other and are arranged along at least one of said sidewalls of the receptacle at different distances from the bottom surface such that the capacitive sensing area extends upwards from the bottom surface.
In a similar technical field, Kostov teaches a device for monitoring of an irregular liquid flow rate, such as urine or another bodily fluid (Abstract), comprising at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes coupled to the sensor plane (the sensors 15-19 are capacitive sensors. One or more sensors 15-19 may be incorporated in a thin, flexible circuit to accommodate a curved surface of the chamber. Alternatively, one or more sensors 15-19 may be embedded on a traditional printed circuit board (PCB) for mounting on a flat surface; [0050]); wherein the at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes have the same surface area as each other and are arranged along at least one of said sidewalls of the receptacle at different distances from the bottom surface such that the capacitive sensing area extends upwards from the bottom surface (a series of sensors 15-19 (where the number of sensors in the series is purely exemplary) that are capable of detecting the presence of the liquid are aligned along the inside or outside surface of the chamber walls, or within the walls themselves. Once a sensor, for instance 17, at a certain height h from the bottom of the chamber senses the presence of liquid at that height, its state changes from “off” to “on,” and the volume of the liquid in the chamber 20 can be readily computed by the controller 24 from the height h and the geometrical dimensions of the chamber; the time elapsed since the last time that the chamber was empty can also be recorded; [0032]; Examiner’s Note: Figures 3A-3B show wherein sensors 15-19 have the same surface area as each other and are arranged along at least one of said sidewalls of the receptacle at different distances from the bottom, extending upwards).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the sensor arrangement teachings of Kostov into the invention of Holt as it provides the advantage of sensing the presence of liquid at the height of the specific sensor, which will change its status from “off” to “on,” and the volume of the liquid in the chamber can be readily computed by the controller 24 from the height h and the geometrical dimensions of the chamber (Kostov [0032]).
Regarding Claim 2, Holt discloses wherein the capacitive sensor circuit is grounded to the fluid filled into the receptacle (calibration is performed prior to use according to the following: (1) a piece of conductive material is adhered to the inside of the container portion 102, opposite to where the capacitive sensor 112 is adhered to the container portion 102 (this is likely done at manufacture of the container portion 102); (2) the conductive material is then grounded to simulate a high urine, other fluid, and/or other substance height within the container portion (this is likely done at manufacture of the container portion 102); (3) when the container portion 102 is installed onto the electronics portion 104, the sensor is taught a 100 percent urine, other fluid, and/or another substance height because of the grounded piece of conductive material adhered to the inside of the container portion 102; [0065]).
Regarding Claim 3, Holt discloses wherein the capacitive sensor circuit comprises a conductive element connecting the receptacle's inner volume to the ground plane (the container portion 102 includes at least one interior shield 122 positioned within the container portion 102 that acts as a mechanical buffer between the urine, other fluid, and/or other substance entering the container portion 102 and the capacitive sensor 112 (or other sensor or sensing element)…the at least one interior shield 122 also is conductive and provides a grounding plane for the capacitance; [0049-0051]).
Regarding Claim 7, Holt discloses wherein the receptacle has a recessed section (channel 120) along one of its sidewalls, said recessed section having a depth that is sufficient to fit the capacitive sensor circuit (exterior surface 110 of the side-wall 106 includes a channel 120 recessed into the exterior surface 110 of the side-wall 106; [0048]); and wherein the device comprises a cover (shielding) configured to secure the capacitive sensor circuit within said recessed section (exterior surface 110 of the side-wall 106 includes a channel 120 recessed into the exterior surface 110 of the side-wall 106, where the capacitive sensor 112 is positioned within the channel 120…shielding is positioned inside and/or outside of the side-wall 106 of the container portion 102 to protect the capacitive sensor 112 (or other sensor or sensing element) against false readings and/or noise in the signals caused by disturbances inside and/or outside of the side-wall 106 of the container portion 102; [0048-0049]).
Regarding Claim 8, Holt discloses wherein said depth of the recessed section is sufficient to fit the electronic module (In exemplary embodiments, to avoid thickening the side-wall 106 to create the flat surface, exterior surface 110 of the side-wall 106 includes a channel 120 recessed into the exterior surface 110 of the side-wall 106, where the capacitive sensor 112 is positioned within the channel 120. In exemplary embodiments, the channel 120 assists in positioning, mitigates potential gaps between the capacitive sensor and the exterior surface 110 of the side-wall 106, and improves signal strength of the capacitive measurement of the fluid on the other side of the side-wall 106 because the side-wall 106 material is thinner in the channel 120 than in other areas and the first capacitive plate 116 can more easily sense inside the container portion 102. In exemplary embodiments, the channel 120 assists with the repeatable placement of the capacitive sensor 112 on the exterior surface 110 of the side-wall 106 both laterally and vertically on the exterior cup's surface; [0048]; Examiner’s Note: Although the channel 120 does not specifically recite holding the electronic module, the limitation only requires that the channel 120 has a recessed section with a depth that is sufficiently capable of doing so).
Regarding Claim 10, Holt discloses wherein the receptacle’s inner volume is tapered towards the bottom surface (side-wall 106 of the container portion 102 includes a conical taper outward from a narrow bottom section to a wider top section (similar in shape to an ice cream cone); [0041]; Figures 1A-1D).
Regarding Claim 11, Holt fails to disclose wherein the at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes are coupled to the sensor plane with electrical connectors of a same length.
Kostov teaches a device for monitoring of an irregular liquid flow rate, such as urine or another bodily fluid (Abstract), wherein the at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes are coupled to the sensor plane with electrical connectors of a same length (the sensors 15-19 are capacitive sensors. One or more sensors 15-19 may be incorporated in a thin, flexible circuit to accommodate a curved surface of the chamber. Alternatively, one or more sensors 15-19 may be embedded on a traditional printed circuit board (PCB) for mounting on a flat surface; [0050]; Examiner’s Note: Because each of the electrodes are incorporated in a thin, flexible circuit or embedded into a traditional printed circuit board, the electrical connectors for each of the electrodes of the circuit and PCB would be of the same length).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the sensor embedding/incorporation teachings of Kostov into the invention of Holt as it provides the advantage of enabling multiple sensors to be easily mounted on a flat surface (Kostov [0050]).
Regarding Claim 15, Holt discloses a fluid stability sensor configured for determining a stability of the fluid within the receptacle and wherein the processing unit is configured to correct the fluid height data by delaying and/or repeating the fluid height measurement by the capacitive sensor circuit when a fluid instability is detected (the optional inertial sensors 1214 are configured to provide inertial measurement data to the controller 1206 that is used to compensate for any tilt of the container portion 102 during measurement of the flow rate and/or urine, other fluid, and/or other substance height and/or volume. In exemplary embodiments, the optional inertial sensors include at least one accelerometer and/or at least one gyroscopes configured to measure tilt in particular directions and/or rotation around particular axes. In exemplary embodiments, the controller 1206 compensates the data for any tilt and/or vertical perturbations detected by the optional inertial sensors 1214 (such as an accelerometers detecting vertical error and/or gyroscopes detecting rotation/tilt) which could lead to false volumetric measurement if not mitigated. In other embodiments, the data from the inertial sensors is included with the data regarding the flow rate and/or urine, other fluid, and/or other substance height and/or volume that is provided to an external device for processing, such as the mobile device 1224, local network device 1238, and/or remote server 1202 described herein and the external device performs the compensation of the data for any tilt and/or vertical perturbations detected by the optional inertial sensors 1214 (such as an accelerometers detecting vertical error and/or gyroscopes detecting rotation/tilt) which could lead to false volumetric measurement if not mitigated. In exemplary embodiments, the data from the optional inertial sensors is used to compensate tilt in combination with a plurality of capacitive sensors 112 (such as capacitive sensors 612A, 612B, and 612C of FIG. 6 described above) and/or the stabilizing handle portion 902 of FIG. 9 described above; [0084]).
Regarding Claim 16, Holt discloses wherein the processing unit is configured to provide user-feedback to stabilise the receptacle for measurement when the fluid instability is detected (data provided by the optional inertial sensors 1214 is used to validate that the bottom of the container portion 102 is parallel to the ground, but is not used to actually compensate for the container portion 102 not being parallel to the ground. Instead, in exemplary embodiments when the data from the optional inertial sensors 1214 indicates that the bottom of the container portion 102 is not parallel to the ground, an alert is provided to the user (such as through the indicator 148), so that the user can attempt to correct the issue. In addition, in exemplary embodiments when the data from the optional inertial sensor 1214 indicates that the bottom of the container portion 102 is not parallel to the ground, a flag can be included in the measurement file to indicate that the device was not level during operation; [0085]).
Regarding Claim 17, Holt discloses wherein the device comprises a tilt sensor configured for measuring a tilt of the receptacle and wherein the processing unit is configured to correct the fluid height data by determining a tilt angle and/or direction and converting the fluid height data into a corrected fluid height data (the optional inertial sensors 1214 are configured to provide inertial measurement data to the controller 1206 that is used to compensate for any tilt of the container portion 102 during measurement of the flow rate and/or urine, other fluid, and/or other substance height and/or volume. In exemplary embodiments, the optional inertial sensors include at least one accelerometer and/or at least one gyroscopes configured to measure tilt in particular directions and/or rotation around particular axes. In exemplary embodiments, the controller 1206 compensates the data for any tilt and/or vertical perturbations detected by the optional inertial sensors 1214 (such as an accelerometers detecting vertical error and/or gyroscopes detecting rotation/tilt) which could lead to false volumetric measurement if not mitigated. In other embodiments, the data from the inertial sensors is included with the data regarding the flow rate and/or urine, other fluid, and/or other substance height and/or volume that is provided to an external device for processing, such as the mobile device 1224, local network device 1238, and/or remote server 1202 described herein and the external device performs the compensation of the data for any tilt and/or vertical perturbations detected by the optional inertial sensors 1214 (such as an accelerometers detecting vertical error and/or gyroscopes detecting rotation/tilt) which could lead to false volumetric measurement if not mitigated. In exemplary embodiments, the data from the optional inertial sensors is used to compensate tilt in combination with a plurality of capacitive sensors 112 (such as capacitive sensors 612A, 612B, and 612C of FIG. 6 described above) and/or the stabilizing handle portion 902 of FIG. 9 described above; [0084]).
Regarding Claim 18, Holt discloses a communication module that is configured to connect to a computing device (the at least one communication module 1212 communicates data to a mobile device 1224; [0086]), and send the determined urine volume to said computing device (the calculated flow rate and/or urine, other fluid, and/or another substance height and/or volume is transmitted to an external device using the at least one communication module 1212; [0083]).
Regarding Claim 19, Holt discloses wherein the processing unit connected to the capacitive sensor circuit is further configured to assign a timestamp to said corresponding urine volume (counter/timer marker; [0058]), and store said corresponding urine volume with the timestamp on a memory unit (a counter/timer marker to be placed into a file by the electronics components within the electronics portion 104; [0058]).
Regarding Claim 20, Holt discloses wherein the conductive element comprises a conductive fastening element provided with a conductive cap (In exemplary embodiments, the sensing portion 124 is coupled to the non-sensing portion through at least one gap/channel/void/aperture 128 below, around the side, and/or through the at least one interior shield 122; [0050]; Examiner’s Note: The sensing portion 124 is coupled to the non-sensing portion of the receptacle through the at least one interior shield 122. Therefore, the interior shield 122 qualifies as a “fastening element”. The interior shield 122 is also conductive and can be configured as a covering, which further qualifies it as a “conductive cap”).
Claims 5-6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holt and Kostov, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tshilombo et al (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0263102).
Regarding Claim 5, Holt and Kostov fail to disclose wherein the electrical shielding is actively driven by a shield signal which corresponds to an input signal of the at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes and/or a copy of the input signal.
In a similar technical field, Tshilombo teaches a hydration container with liquid volume measurement (Abstract), wherein the electrical shielding (conductive shield 1606) is actively driven by a shield signal which corresponds to an input signal of the at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes and/or a copy of the input signal (the conductive shield 1606 is an active shield that is set to a charging voltage potential (Vcc), which is the supply voltage to which the capacitive sensor 1604 is charged. In at least some implementations, the conductive shield 1606 is an active shield that is set to a sensed voltage potential, which is the potential at which the capacitive sensor 1604 is sensed by the microcontroller; [0115]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the active shielding teachings of into Tshilombo those of Holt and Kostov as it provides the advantage of utilizing the potential at which the capacitive sensor is sensed by the microcontroller (Tshilombo [0115]).
Regarding Claim 6, Holt discloses wherein the capacitive sensor circuit is integrated in at least one of the sidewalls of the receptacle (In exemplary embodiments, to avoid thickening the side-wall 106 to create the flat surface, exterior surface 110 of the side-wall 106 includes a channel 120 recessed into the exterior surface 110 of the side-wall 106, where the capacitive sensor 112 is positioned within the channel 120; [0048]).
Holt and Kostov fail to teach wherein the electronic module is integrated in at least one of the sidewalls of the receptacle.
In a similar technical field, Tshilombo teaches a hydration container with liquid volume measurement (Abstract), wherein the electronic module (microcontroller 1701) is integrated in at least one of the sidewalls of the receptacle (FIG. 17 shows a sectional view of a container assembly 1700 that includes the capacitive sensor 1604, the conductive shield 1606 and the insulation layer 1608 that electrically isolates the capacitive sensor and the conductive shield. In this example, each of the capacitive sensor 1604 and the conductive shield 1606 are electrically coupled to a microcontroller 1701. The capacitive sensor 1604 may be electrically coupled to an input node of the microcontroller 1701; [0117]; Figures 16-17; Examiner’s Note: The microcontroller 1701 is integrated into the sensor 1604, which surrounds the container 1602; therefore, it is integrated into at least one of its sidewalls).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the coupled microcontroller teachings of into Tshilombo those of Holt and Kostov as it provides the advantage of a grounded conductive shield and to reduce jumps or spikes in capacitive measurement readings (Tshilombo [0118]).
Regarding Claim 13, Holt and Kostov fail to disclose wherein the processing unit is configured to determine the corresponding urine volume by looking up a corresponding value in a calibration curve and/or look-up table that describes a relationship between the fluid height and the receptacle's open-ended inner volume.
In a similar technical field, Tshilombo teaches a hydration container with liquid volume measurement (Abstract), wherein the processing unit is configured to determine the corresponding urine volume by looking up a corresponding value in a calibration curve and/or look-up table that describes a relationship between the fluid height and the receptacle's open-ended inner volume (Autonomously determining a volume of liquid present in the container body may include implementing at least one of a lookup table, a regression curve fit, or an artificial neural network model to autonomously determine a volume of liquid present in the container body based at least in part on the received capacitive sensor signal; [0015]; At 1406, after one or more of the aforementioned parameters have been detected or measured, the liquid volume may be determined using a lookup table 1414, a regression formula 1416, an artificial neural network (ANN) 1418, or other suitable algorithm. A lookup table 1414 may use the capacitance, container position angles, and/or temperature obtained through a calibration process to determine the liquid volume present in the container. A regression formula 1416 may include performing calculation using a formula derived from a multivariable regression curve fit obtained during calibration of the container. An ANN model 1418 may take as inputs the capacitance, container position angles, and/or temperature, and the output is liquid volume; [0106-0108]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the calibration and look-up table teachings of into Tshilombo those of Holt and Kostov as it provides the advantage of incorporating different algorithms, such as a regression formula or an artificial neural network (ANN), and multiple parameters, such as capacitance and container position angles, in order to most accurately determine the liquid volume present in the container (Tshilombo [0106-0108]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holt and Kostov, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sieh et al (U.S. Publication No. 2009/0165552).
Regarding Claim 9, Holt and Kostov fail to teach one or more sealing elements disposed between the receptacle and the cover so that fluid cannot reach the capacitive sensor circuit.
In a similar technical field, Sieh teaches a liquid level sensing device and method (Abstract), comprising one or more sealing elements disposed between the receptacle and the cover so that fluid cannot reach the capacitive sensor circuit (electrodes 22 may also be covered using a film (not shown) having a low dielectric such that electrodes 22 are electrically and physically insulated from the liquid whose level is being sensed; [0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the film teachings of into Sieh those of Holt and Kostov as it provides the advantage of both electrically and physically insulating the electrodes from the liquid whose level is being sensed (Sieh [0016]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holt and Kostov, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Medendorp, Jr. et al (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0028216).
Regarding Claim 12, although Holt teaches wherein the ground plane is made of a conductive material such as copper (second capacitive plate 118 are made of conductive material such as aluminum, gold, copper, or an alloy of conductive materials; [0044]), Holt and Kostov fail to specifically teach wherein the ground plane is hatched.
In a similar technical field, Medendorp teaches a capacitor (capacitor 353), wherein the ground plane is hatched (The front extension signal guard 310 may be patterned (e.g., in a hatch, mesh, etc.) with copper to form a Faraday cage to insulate the front extension capacitive touch active pad 322, which may include a continuous (e.g., solid copper) conductive surface; [0223]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the hatched teachings of into Medendorp those of Holt and Kostov as it provides the advantage of a Faraday cage for insulation purposes and to provide a continuous conductive surface (Medendorp [0223]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holt and Kostov, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lofgren et al (U.S. Publication No. 2014/0327453; previously cited).
Regarding Claim 14, Holt discloses wherein the capacitive sensor circuit comprises a reference capacitive sensor electrode (a second capacitive plate 118 (acting as a reference electrode to get a reference measurement outside the container portion 102); [0044]).
Holt and Kostov fail to disclose wherein the electrode is further configured to determine a baseline value independent of a presence of said fluid in the receptacle; and wherein the processing unit is configured to receive the baseline value from said electrode and determine the presence and/or an absence of said fluid in the receptacle by comparing said baseline value with a capacitance value measured by one or more of the at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes.
In a similar technical field, Lofgren teaches a urine production handling device (Abstract; urine measuring device 100), wherein the electrode is configured to determine a baseline value independent of a presence of said fluid in the receptacle (baseline level tracker 650); and wherein the processing unit is configured to receive the baseline value from said electrode and determine the presence and/or an absence of said fluid in the receptacle by comparing said baseline value with a capacitance value measured by one or more of the at least two capacitive surface sensor electrodes (the device is also provided with a set of electrodes (620) arranged to sense a changing capacitance (Cm(t)) corresponding to changing levels of urine in the self-emptying measurement chamber (120), wherein the set of electrodes comprises: a first electrode (140, 310, 652) and a second electrode (320, 654) between which the changing capacitance (x, Cm(t)) is measured…and wherein the first and second electrodes (140, 310, 652, 320, 654) to sense the changing capacitance corresponding to changing levels of urine in the measurement chamber (120) are arranged at the socket wall (137, 139, 330) to face the measurement chamber (120), the device further comprises a data processing unit (610) connected to the electrodes (140, 310, 652, 320, 654) to keep track of produced urine volume and a baseline level tracker (650) arranged to determine and keep track of a varying baseline level, i.e., a capacitance value corresponding to an empty self-emptying measurement chamber, based on the changing capacitance; [0024-0026]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the baseline teachings of into Lofgren those of Holt and Kostov as it provides the advantage of keeping track of the baseline level, i.e., a capacitance value corresponding to an empty self-emptying measurement chamber and further based on the changing capacitance values as the fluid levels change (Lofgren [0024-0025]).
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 CHANEL J YOON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2695. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Alexander Valvis can be reached on 571-272-4233. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHANEL J YOON/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights