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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fallast (AT505607 A1) in view of Cho (JP2018-113902A). As the cited AT and JP publications are in a non-English language, machine-translated versions of the publications will be cited to (attached).
Regarding Claims 1-3 and 6, Fallast teaches probes/sensors for livestock (Page 1) comprising seals / sealing rings to protect against ingress of acidic rumen from entering a space that contains sensors/substrate of the sensor (Pages 2 and 9; Figure 4), construed as gaskets / o-rings / packing that prevents a body fluid containing organic acid in livestock from entering a space that contains sensors/substrate of the sensor.
Fallast differs from the subject matter claimed in that resin or rubber free of chlorine atom is not described as particular materials. Cho is also directed toward sensors for rumen liquids of livestock (Abstract; ¶ 1). Cho teaches it was known in the art fluororesins such as polytetrafluoroethylene/Teflon are capable of forming protective sealing films that do not decompose with respect to rumen fluid (¶ 26, 29, 35). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize fluororesins such as polytetrafluoroethylene/Teflon for the seals of Fallast because such materials would be resistant to decomposition within rumen fluid as taught by Cho.
Regarding Claims 4 and 5, the combination of references suggests the use of fluororesin, which satisfies “a resin or a rubber” of claim 1. As claims 4 and 5 only serve to further limit the rubber option of claim 1, the disclosure of the prior art is still seen to meet the claims.
Claim(s) 1-6 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fallast (AT505607 A1) in view of Farnsworth (US 2003/0211264 A1). As the cited AT publication is in a non-English language, a machine-translated version of the publication will be cited to (attached).
Regarding Claims 1-6, Fallast teaches probes/sensors for livestock (Page 1) comprising seals / sealing rings to protect against ingress of acidic rumen from entering a space that contains sensors/substrate of the sensor (Pages 2 and 9; Figure 4), construed as gaskets / o-rings / packing that prevents a body fluid containing organic acid in livestock from entering a space that contains sensors/substrate of the sensor.
Fallast differs from the subject matter claimed in that resin or rubber free of chlorine atom is not described as particular materials. Farnsworth teaches elastomer compositions suitable for use as gaskets / o-rings (Abstract; ¶ 18). Farnsworth teaches the compositions are substantially non-permeable, have thermal resistance, and are resistant to chemical attack / great inertness (¶ 1, 13, 34-37). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the elastomers of Farnsworth within the seals of Fallast because doing so would provide non-permeable seals with thermal resistance and inertness toward chemical attack as taught by Farnsworth.
Farnsworth teaches examples where ring gaskets are prepared comprising expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (fluororesin) and tetrafluoroethylene/perfluoromethyl vinyl ether (perfluororubber) (¶ 25-26, 76-77).
Claim(s) 1-6 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fallast (AT505607 A1) in view of Underwood (US 2016/0289399 A1). As the cited AT publication is in a non-English language, a machine-translated version of the publication will be cited to (attached).
Regarding Claims 1 and 4-6, Fallast teaches probes/sensors for livestock (Page 1) comprising seals / sealing rings to protect against ingress of acidic rumen from entering a space that contains sensors/substrate of the sensor (Pages 2 and 9; Figure 4), construed as gaskets / o-rings / packing that prevents a body fluid containing organic acid in livestock from entering a space that contains sensors/substrate of the sensor.
Fallast differs from the subject matter claimed in that resin or rubber free of chlorine atom is not described as particular materials. Underwood teaches perfluoropolymer materials (Abstract) suitable for use within o-rings / gaskets / seals that are subject to corrosive environments or extreme operating conditions (¶ 3, 7, 18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the perfluoropolymer materials of Underwood within the seals of Fallast because doing so would provide seals that are resistive to corrosive environments and operating conditions as taught by Underwood.
Regarding Claims 2 and 3, the combination of references suggests the use of perfluororubber, which satisfies “a resin or a rubber” of claim 1. As claims 4 and 5 only serve to further limit the resin option of claim 1, the disclosure of the prior art is still seen to meet the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN E RIETH whose telephone number is (571)272-6274. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8AM-4PM Mountain Standard Time.
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, Duane Smith can be reached at (571)272-1166. 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.
/STEPHEN E RIETH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759