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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I invention in the reply filed on 05 January 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Applicant's election with traverse of: Species 1: capacitive; Species II: Fig. 1; Species III: Fig. 2 in the reply filed on 05 January 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no undue burden placed on the Examiner to search and examiner to examine the application if the species election is not made. This is not found persuasive because each of the identified species requires individual search and consideration to be performed by the Examiner, for example, the different types of sensors of Species I each have different functionality and structural operational aspects and are classified separately in determinations of fluid levels, resulting in the Examiner searching multiple classifications and considerations on structural mounting. As to the other species, methodology and structural differences of the identified species also would require individual search and consideration to be performed by the Examiner due to associated classification and functionality and/or structure. Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to non-elected invention Groups II and III. Instant dependent claims 5, 8, 9 and 14 are also withdrawn from consideration as being directed to non-elected Species II Figs 4-5 and Species III Fig. 3.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first, second, third and fourth fill levels must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). While the instant filed drawings and specification disclose general “levels,” and employ reference numbers 114, 116 and 144 (note: reference number 144 is employed to indicate two separate levels), the instant filed specification fails to employ the claim limitations “first level,” “second level,” “third level,” and “fourth level,” as well as the associated liquid sensors, respectively. No new matter should be entered.
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
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: first level, second level, third level and fourth level, as well as first sensor, second sensor, third sensor and fourth sensor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. The instant filed disclosure fails to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make and/or use the claimed invention for the following reasons. Instant independent claim 1 recites limitations regarding first and second liquid level sensors placed to measure/obtain first and second measured readings indicative of first and second amounts, via control circuitry, and subsequently, via the control circuitry, determine one or more single-threshold conditions are met at a time the second measured reading exceeds a second fill level threshold and that a multiple-threshold condition is met at a time that the first measured reading exceeds a first fill-level threshold and a second measured reading exceeds a supplemental threshold; the supplemental threshold different than the second fill-level threshold; and generate an elevated fill-level indication that the flask is filled at least to the second fill level at a time that the one or more single-threshold conditions are met; and generate a first fill-level indication that the flask if filled to the first fill level at a time that the multiple-threshold condition is met. However, the instant filed specification fails to employ the terms “first liquid sensor” and “second level sensor,” or the associated “first measured reading” and “second measured reading.” (note: this identically applies to instant dependent claims 2-4 which employ third and fourth liquid sensors and readings). Applying the Wands factors (see In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 737, 8 USPQ2d 1400, 1404 (Fed. Cir. 1988)), Wands factor (F), the amount of direction provided by the inventor, the instant filed disclosure fails to provide sufficient/adequate directions in regards to exactly which of the potentially four fluid sensors and their associated measured readings, and clear association of two or more of these four readings to associated fill-levels (met or exceeding a predetermined value for the associated fill-level) in relation to any specific one or more single-threshold conditions and/or multiple-threshold conditions, and exactly how to establish the one or more single-thresholds and multiple-threshold conditions being met. Wands factor (G), the existence of working examples, the instant filed disclosure fails to provide a single working example wherein specific liquid sensors (two of the four) are employed along with their relative locations within the flask with their measured readings, and associated fill-levels (met or exceeding a predetermined value for the associated fill-level) and appropriately chosen or established one or more single thresholds and multiple-threshold conditions being met to perform the claimed invention. The above also applies to subsequent generation of highest fill-level and the associated threshold conditions and/or operational tolerances recited in instant dependent claims 6, 7 and 13. As such, the instant disclosure fails to enable the instant claimed invention of claim 1, and, as such, all other dependents are similarly rejected due to their dependency.
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 1-4, 6, 7 and 10-13 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Instant independent claim 1 employs limitations “first liquid sensor” and “second level sensor,” and associated “first measured reading” and “second measured reading.” (note: this identically applies to instant dependent claims 2-4 which employ third and fourth liquid sensors and readings), however, the instant filed specification fails to employ these terms, nor do the instant drawings clearly identify the recited level sensors relative to one another, thus rendering the claimed invention indefinite, for it is unclear as to which specific liquid sensors and their associated measurements are being recited in the claim. All other claims are rejected due to their dependency.
In addition, instant independent claim 1 recites the limitations: “the second measured reading exceeds a second fill-level threshold; determine that a multiple-threshold condition is met at a time that: the first measured reading exceeds a first fill-level threshold; and the second measured reading exceeds a supplemental threshold, the supplemental threshold different than the second fill-level threshold.” The instant filed specification defines a “fill-level threshold” as: “fill-level threshold may include a predetermined value selected to indicate liquid saturation (emphasis added) and that “supplemental thresholds may indicate partial liquid saturation (emphasis added) at fill levels where the corresponding liquid sensor they are exceeded.” The term “saturation” is broadly defined as: “a state of maximum impregnation” or “complete infiltration/permeation.” Thus it is unclear as to what is exactly occurring in regards to measurements made by the liquid-level sensors. Are the liquid sensors absorbing the liquid to obtain a saturation amount/condition, or is the liquid saturation of the liquid sensors related to a complete or partial immersion of the liquid sensors? This renders instant independent claim 1 and its dependents indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
As best understood, claim(s) 1-4, 6, 7 and 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. 20110314907 to Wiedekind-Klein. Wiedekind-Klein discloses a device having all of the structural elements recited (see entire reference) for measuring a liquid level in a flask/container (220, 320, 420) having multiple liquid level sensors (103-112, 303, 403, 406, 407) configured to obtain measured readings at each of the liquid level sensors (thus teaches first, second, third and fourth level sensors and measurements recited in instant independent claim 1-4); control circuitry (114, 214, 314, 414) in operative communication with the multiple liquid sensors, capable of being programmed/configured to perform all the recited method/process/control steps recited in claims 1-4, 6, 7 and 10-13, wherein the method/process/control steps do not limit the structure of the device/apparatus and have little to no patentable weight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is invited to review PTO form 892 accompanying this Office Action listing Prior Art relevant to the instant invention cited by the Examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner John Fitzgerald whose telephone number is (571) 272-2843. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:00 AM to 3:30 PM E.S.T. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor John Breene, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-4107. 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. The central 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.
/JOHN FITZGERALD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855