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 .
Claim Objections
The objections to the numbering of claims 1-20 and to the antecedent basis of claim 7 are withdrawn in view of the amendment filed 27 March 2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (US 9,651,415 B2) in view of Cao et al. (US 2020/0197089 A1), and further, in view of Boland et al. (US 4,526,136).
Regarding claim 51, Song et al. discloses a method for determining at least one property of a fluid (inside distillation column 610; fig. 6), comprising: heating the fluid exposed to a sensing cable (101) at a surface at least partly surrounding the sensing cable (heating element 103 inside sensing cable 101 heats the fluid in distillation column 610; c. 6, ll. 40-43); and determining the at least one property of the fluid based at least in part on output of the sensing cable (properties of the fluid, such as determining an interface between media, is determined based on an output of sensing cable 101; c. 19, l. 65 – c. 20, l. 4).
Regarding claim 52, Song et al. discloses the step of determining the at least one property of the fluid further comprising monitoring the output of the sensing cable (101) with an optical signal interrogator (signal interrogator 104 monitors the output of optical fiber sensor array 102 in sensing cable 101; c. 6, ll. 43-45).
Regarding claim 53, Song et al. discloses wherein determining the at least one property of the fluid further comprises determining temperature from the output of the sensing cable (temperature is determined from the output of sensing cable 101; c. 6, ll. 43-45).
Regarding claim 54, Song et al. discloses classifying the output of the sensing cable (101) as one classification in a set of classifications including at least a stable condition classification and an unstable condition classification, determined based at least in part upon the output of the sensing cable (an output of sensing cable 101 is classified from a set of classifications including stable and unstable conditions; c. 18, ll. 18-22).
Regarding claim 55, Song et al. discloses wherein the heating the fluid exposed to a sensing cable (101; fig. 6) further comprising heating the fluid exposed to the sensing cable in a tray (620) of a distillation column (610; c. 18, ll. 36-44).
Regarding claim 56, Song et al. discloses wherein the determining the at least one property of the fluid further comprises identifying at least one interface between one or more of (a) two phases of matter present within the fluid (determining an interface between two phases of media; c. 19, l. 65 – c. 20, l. 4), (b) two species present within the fluid, and (c) the fluid and a surrounding atmosphere (determining an interface between air, oil, emulsion, and water layers; c. 14, ll. 64-67).
Regarding claim 57, Song et al. discloses wherein the identifying at least one interface further comprises determining a difference in the output of the sensing cable (101) corresponding to adjacent sensor locations (701a, 701b; fig. 7) of a plurality of sensor locations, the plurality of sensors locations aligned orthogonally to a bottom surface of the tray (a difference in output of sensing cable 101 corresponds to adjacent sensor locations 701a and 701b of a plurality of sensor locations which are aligned orthogonally to a bottom surface of tray 620; c. 19, l. 65 – c. 20, l. 4).
Regarding claim 59, Song et al. discloses further comprising controlling the heating element (103; fig. 1A) with an excitation source (105) communicatively coupled with the optical signal interrogator (104).
Regarding claim 60, Song et al. discloses wherein the controlling the heating element (103) is based at least in part on a measurement made by a secondary sensor (at least one of a plurality of sensors in sensor array 102; c. 6, ll. 29-33) communicatively coupled with the excitation source (control of heating element 103 is based at least in part by measurements made by one of a plurality of sensors in sensor array 102 which is a secondary sensor coupled with excitation source 105; c. 8, ll. 15-19, c. 11, l. 61 – c. 12, l. 2, and c. 15, ll. 1-6).
Although Song et al. discloses that heating the sensing cable transfers heat to the fluid to identify interfaces between layers of media (c. 6, ll. 1-15 and c. 21, ll. 2-9), Song et al. is silent on the surface of the sensing cable having a particular texture.
However, it is well known in heat transferring systems that a greater surface area of a heat transfer component allows for greater heat transfer. Cao et al. teaches a tubular heat exchange surface (426; fig. 4) which has been subjected to one or more of chemical etching, abrading, scoring, grinding, or laser ablation (heat exchange surface 426 including convective fins 436 are made by mechanical, abrasive, chemical etching, or laser techniques; ¶ [0042]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Song et al. with the surface treatment of Cao et al. to increase the surface area of the heat exchange surface of the sensing cable to improve heat transfer (Cao et al., ¶ [0044]).
Although Song et al. is silent on nucleate boiling, Song et al. discloses that heating the sensing cable transfers heat to the fluid and the resulting temperature response of different phases of media is used to identify interfaces between layers of media (c. 6, ll. 1-15 and c. 21, ll. 2-9).
Boland et al. teaches that a nucleate boiling region has in increased heat-transfer rate compared to other cooled or heated regions (c. 1, ll. 18-36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to further modify the apparatus of Song et al. to heat the fluid to induce nucleate boiling as taught in Boland et al. to improve determination of interfaces between media phases by increasing the temperature response at different sensor locations by increasing the heat transfer to the medium. In modifying the apparatus of Song et al. in view of Boland et al., one of ordinary skill would have known that a nucleating surface is the surface of the sensing cable which transfers heat to the fluid to induce nucleate boiling.
Regarding claim 61, Song et al. discloses a system for determining at least one property of a fluid (inside distillation column 610; fig. 6), comprising: a sensing cable (101) including an optical fiber sensor array (102) located within the sensing cable (c. 6, ll. 29-33); a heating element (103) aligned with the optical fiber sensor array (102); and a surface, at least partly surrounding the sensing cable (101), to induce heating of the fluid exposed to the surface when heated by the heating element (heating element 103 inside sensing cable 101 heats the fluid in distillation column 610 via an outer surface of sensing cable 101; c. 6, ll. 40-43).
Regarding claim 62, Song et al. discloses an optical signal interrogator (104), communicatively coupled with the optical fiber sensor array (102), to monitor output of the sensing cable (101) and determine the at least one property based at least in part on the output of the sensing cable (signal interrogator 104 monitors the output of optical fiber sensor array 102 in sensing cable 101 and determine a property of the fluid; c. 6, ll. 43-45).
Regarding claim 63, Song et al. discloses wherein the optical signal interrogator (104) is adapted to measure temperature and wherein the output of the sensing cable (101) corresponds to a temperature measurement (optical signal interrogator 104 measures temperature and an output of sensing cable 101 corresponds to temperature measurement; c. 6, ll. 43-45 and c. 8, ll. 13-15).
Regarding claim 64, Song et al. discloses further comprising a control unit (106), coupled to the optical signal interrogator (104), to classify the output of the sensing cable (101) as one of a predetermined set of classifications including at least a stable condition classification and an unstable condition classification, determined based at least in part upon the output of the sensing cable (control unit 106 is coupled to signal interrogator 104 to classify an output of sensing cable 101 from a set of classifications including stable and unstable conditions; c. 8, ll. 13-22 and c. 18, ll. 18-22).
Regarding claim 65, Song et al. discloses wherein the fluid is located in a tray (620) of a distillation column (610; c. 18, ll. 36-44).
Regarding claim 66, Song et al. discloses wherein the optical fiber sensor array (102) further includes a plurality of sensor locations (701a, 701b; fig. 7)) aligned orthogonally to a bottom surface of the tray (sensor locations 701a and 701b of a plurality of sensor locations are aligned orthogonally to a bottom surface of tray 620), and wherein the control unit (106) is further configured to determine the at least one property of the fluid exposed to the sensing cable (101) by identifying at least one interface between one or more of (a) two phases of matter present within the fluid (control unit 106 determines an interface between two phases of media; c. 19, l. 65 – c. 20, l. 4), (b) two species present within the fluid, and (c) the fluid and a surrounding atmosphere (control unit 106 determines an interface between air, oil, emulsion, and water layers; c. 14, ll. 64-67).
Regarding claim 67, Song et al. discloses wherein the control unit (106) is further configured to identify the at least one interface by determining a difference in the output of the sensing cable (101) corresponding to adjacent sensor locations (701a, 701b; fig. 7) of the plurality of sensor locations (a difference in output of sensing cable 101 corresponds to adjacent sensor locations 701a and 701b of a plurality of sensor locations; c. 19, l. 65 – c. 20, l. 4).
Regarding claim 68, Song et al. discloses further an excitation source (105; fig. 1A) communicatively coupled with the optical signal interrogator (104), to control the heating element with a heat signal (excitation source 105 controls heating element 103; c. 6, ll. 40-43).
Regarding claim 69, Song et al. discloses wherein the heat signal is chosen based at least in part on a measurement made by a secondary sensor (at least one of a plurality of sensors in sensor array 102; c. 6, ll. 29-33) communicatively coupled with the excitation source (control of heating element 103 is based at least in part by measurements made by one of a plurality of sensors in sensor array 102 which is a secondary sensor coupled with excitation source 105; c. 8, ll. 15-19, c. 11, l. 61 – c. 12, l. 2, and c. 15, ll. 1-6).
Although Song et al. discloses that heating the sensing cable transfers heat to the fluid to identify interfaces between layers of media (c. 6, ll. 1-15 and c. 21, ll. 2-9), Song et al. is silent on the surface of the sensing cable having a particular texture.
However, it is well known in heat transferring systems that a greater surface area of a heat transfer component allows for greater heat transfer. Cao et al. teaches a tubular heat exchange surface (426; fig. 4) which has been subjected to one or more of chemical etching, abrading, scoring, grinding, or laser ablation (heat exchange surface 426 including convective fins 436 are made by mechanical, abrasive, chemical etching, or laser techniques; ¶ [0042]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Song et al. with the surface treatment of Cao et al. to increase the surface area of the heat exchange surface of the sensing cable to improve heat transfer (Cao et al., ¶ [0044]).
Although Song et al. is silent on nucleate boiling, Song et al. discloses that heating the sensing cable transfers heat to the fluid and the resulting temperature response of different phases of media is used to identify interfaces between layers of media (c. 6, ll. 1-15 and c. 21, ll. 2-9).
Boland et al. teaches that a nucleate boiling region has in increased heat-transfer rate compared to other cooled or heated regions (c. 1, ll. 18-36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to further modify the apparatus of Song et al. to heat the fluid to induce nucleate boiling as taught in Boland et al. to improve determination of interfaces between media phases by increasing the temperature response at different sensor locations by increasing the heat transfer to the medium. In modifying the apparatus of Song et al. in view of Boland et al., one of ordinary skill would have known that a nucleating surface is the surface of the sensing cable which transfers heat to the fluid to induce nucleate boiling.
Regarding claim 70, Song et al. discloses a system for determining at least one property of a fluid on a tray (620; fig. 6) of a distillation column (610), comprising: a sensing cable (101) including an optical fiber sensor array (102) located within the sensing cable (c. 6, ll. 29-33); a heating element (103) aligned with the optical fiber sensor array (102); a surface, at least partly surrounding the sensing cable (101), to induce heating of the fluid exposed to the surface when heated by the heating element (heating element 103 inside sensing cable 101 heats the fluid in distillation column 610 via an outer surface of sensing cable 101; c. 6, ll. 40-43); an optical signal interrogator (104; fig. 1A), communicatively coupled with the optical fiber sensor array (102), to monitor output of the sensing cable (101) and determine the at least one property based at least in part on the output of the sensing cable (optical signal interrogator 104 measures temperature and an output of sensing cable 101 corresponds to temperature measurement; c. 6, ll. 43-45 and c. 8, ll. 13-15), wherein the optical signal interrogator (104) is adapted to measure temperature and wherein the output of the sensing cable (101) corresponds to a temperature measurement (optical signal interrogator 104 measures temperature and an output of sensing cable 101 corresponds to temperature measurement; c. 6, ll. 43-45 and c. 8, ll. 13-15); a control unit (106), coupled to the optical signal interrogator (104), to classify the output of the sensing cable (101) as one of a predetermined set of classifications including at least a stable condition classification and an unstable condition classification, determined based at least in part upon the output of the sensing cable (control unit 106 is coupled to signal interrogator 104 to classify an output of sensing cable 101 from a set of classifications including stable and unstable conditions; c. 8, ll. 13-22 and c. 18, ll. 18-22), wherein the optical fiber sensor array (102) further includes a plurality of sensor locations (701a, 701b; fig. 7)) aligned orthogonally to a bottom surface of the tray (sensor locations 701a and 701b of a plurality of sensor locations are aligned orthogonally to a bottom surface of tray 620), and wherein the control unit (106) is further configured to determine the at least one property of the fluid exposed to the sensing cable (101) by identifying at least one interface between one or more of (a) two phases of matter present within the fluid (control unit 106 determines an interface between two phases of media; c. 19, l. 65 – c. 20, l. 4), (b) two species present within the fluid, and (c) the fluid and a surrounding atmosphere (control unit 106 determines an interface between air, oil, emulsion, and water layers; c. 14, ll. 64-67).
Although Song et al. discloses that heating the sensing cable transfers heat to the fluid to identify interfaces between layers of media (c. 6, ll. 1-15 and c. 21, ll. 2-9), Song et al. is silent on the surface of the sensing cable having a particular texture.
However, it is well known in heat transferring systems that a greater surface area of a heat transfer component allows for greater heat transfer. Cao et al. teaches a tubular heat exchange surface (426; fig. 4) which has been subjected to one or more of chemical etching, abrading, scoring, grinding, or laser ablation (heat exchange surface 426 including convective fins 436 are made by mechanical, abrasive, chemical etching, or laser techniques; ¶ [0042]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Song et al. with the surface treatment of Cao et al. to increase the surface area of the heat exchange surface of the sensing cable to improve heat transfer (Cao et al., ¶ [0044]).
Although Song et al. is silent on nucleate boiling, Song et al. discloses that heating the sensing cable transfers heat to the fluid and the resulting temperature response of different phases of media is used to identify interfaces between layers of media (c. 6, ll. 1-15 and c. 21, ll. 2-9).
Boland et al. teaches that a nucleate boiling region has in increased heat-transfer rate compared to other cooled or heated regions (c. 1, ll. 18-36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to further modify the apparatus of Song et al. to heat the fluid to induce nucleate boiling as taught in Boland et al. to improve determination of interfaces between media phases by increasing the temperature response at different sensor locations by increasing the heat transfer to the medium. In modifying the apparatus of Song et al. in view of Boland et al., one of ordinary skill would have known that a nucleating surface is the surface of the sensing cable which transfers heat to the fluid to induce nucleate boiling.
Regarding claim 58, Song et al. in view of Boland et al. disclose the invention as set forth above with regard to claim 51, respectively, and Song et al. further discloses pulsed heating (c. 11, ll. 24-27).
However, Song et al. teaches that continuous heating is an alternative to pulsed heating (c. 11, ll. 19-21), despite consuming more electrical energy, and also teaches making temperature measurements continuously (c. 8, ll. 15-19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Song et al. in view of Boland et al. to continuously heat the fluid because it chooses from one of two identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claim(s) 51, 61, and 70 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
With regard to Song et al. in view of Boland et al., Applicant argues that “Song teaches maintaining a controlled electric pulse through its heating wire, which results in localized heat transfer rates through the wire and into the surrounding media” and “the localized heat transfer rates (and the corresponding temperature profile) along the wire would be disrupted significantly” by inducing nucleate boiling, as taught in Boland. Response, page 2. However, although Song et al. discloses benefits of pulsed heating over continuous heating “such as decreased electrical energy usage and for measurement of dynamic conditions of surrounding materials” (c. 11, ll. 17-27), a pulsed heating system may still benefit from the increased heat-transfer from nucleate boiling as taught in Boland et al (c. 1, ll. 18-36). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to induce nucleate boiling as taught in Boland et al. to improve heat transfer to the medium in the apparatus of Song thus improving determination of interfaces between media phases. Additionally, Song et al. teaches that continuous heating is an alternative to pulsed heating (c. 11, ll. 19-21), despite consuming more electrical energy, and also teaches making temperature measurements continuously (c. 8, ll. 15-19).
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erika J. Villaluna whose telephone number is (571)272-8348. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00 am - 5:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at (571) 272-3555. 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.
/ERIKA J. VILLALUNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights